AMAÇ: Bu çalışmada çıkartılan lenf nodu sayısıyla lenf nodu pozitifliği arasındaki ilişki arsındaki ilişki araştırıldı. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: 1993-2007 arasında tanısı konup tip III radikal histerektomi ve sistematik pelvik ve para-aortik lenfa denektomi yapılan 250 hastanın verileri incelendi. Hastaların 171’i IB1, 30’u IB2 ve 49’u IIA’ydı. BULGULAR: Hastaların yaş ortalaması 53.9’du. Hastaların %34’ünde lenf nodu pozitifliği saptandı. Çıkarılan lenf nodu sa yısı median 52’ydi (13-160). Hastaların 9’unda 20 ve altında lenf nodu çıkartılmışken, 29’unda 21-30 arasında, 46’sında 31- 40 arasında, 36’sında 41-50 arasında, 39’unda 51-60 arasın da, 39’unda 61-70 arasında, 25’inde 71-80 arasında ve 27’sin de 80’in üzerinde lenf nodunun çıkartıldığı belirlendi. En düşük lenf nodu pozitifliği lenf nodunun en az çıkarıldığı grupta (%11.1), en yüksek lenf nodu pozitifliği (%60.4) 31-40 arasın da lenf nodu çıkarılan grupta gözlendi. Ancak, çıkarılan lenf no du sayısıyla metastatik lenf nodunu saptayabilme arasında iliş ki bulunmadı. SONUÇ: Çıkarılan lenf nodu sayısıyla lenf nodu metastazını saptayabilme arasında ilişki olmadığı görüldü. Ancak, en düşük lenf nodu pozitifliği en az lenf nodu çıkarılan gruptaydı.
Objective: Understanding the relation between the numbers of removed lymph node and getting positive lymph node. Study Design: Medical records of 250 patients diagnosed as stage IB-IIA cervical cancer and treated with type III radical hysterectomy plus systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in between January 1993 and December 2007 were evaluated. Clinical stage IB1 tumor was present in 171 patients, IB2 in 30 patients and IIA in 49 patients. Results: The mean age of patients was 53.9 years. The metastatic node was determined in 34% of patients. The median number of removed nodes was 52 (13-160). It was removed 20 or less lymph nodes in 3.6% of patients, 21-30 lymph nodes removed in 11.6% of patients, 31-40 lymph nodes in 18.4% of patients, 41-50 lymph nodes in 14.4% of patients, 51- 60 lymph nodes in 15.6% of patients, 61-70 lymph nodes in 15.6% of patients, 71- 80 lymph nodes in 10% of patients and more than 80 in 10.8% of patients. The positive lymph node incidence was at minimum (11.1 %) in the ≤20 lymph nodes removed group and incidence was at maximum (60.4%) was observed in 31-40 lymph nodes removed group. However, there was no significant relationship between the number of removed nodes and getting positive lymph nodes. Conclusion: There was no relationship between number of lymph nodes removed and the chance of finding metastasis. However, the percentage of positive lymph nodes was lowest in the group where lowest number of nodes was removed.
1. Sakuragi N, Satoh C, Takeda N, et al. Incidence and dis tribution pattern of pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with Stages IB, IIA, and IIB cervi cal carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy. Cancer 1999; 85(7):1547-54
2. Benedetti-Panici P, Maneschi F, Scambia G, et al. Lymphatic spread of cervical cancer: an anatomical and pathological study based on 225 radical hysterectomies with systematic pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol 1996; 62(1):19-24
3. Benedetti-Panici P, Maneschi F, D'Andrea G, et al. Early cervical carcinoma: the natural history of lymph node in volvement redefined on the basis of thorough parametrec tomy and giant section study. Cancer 2000; 88(10):2267- 74
4. Benedetti-Panici P, Maggioni A, Hacker N, et al. Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus re section of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked ad vanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(8):560-6
5. Hacker NF, Wain GV, Nicklin JL. Resection of bulky pos itive lymph nodes in patients with cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1995; 5(4):250-6.
6. Cosin JA, Fowler JM, Chen MD, Paley PJ, Carson LF, Twiggs LB. Pretreatment surgical staging of patients with cervical carcinoma: the case for lymph node debulking. Cancer 1998; 82(11):2241-8.
7. Sevin BU, Nadji M, Lampe B, et al. Prognostic factors of early stage cervical cancer treated by radical hysterec tomy. Cancer 1995; 76:1978-86
8. Piura B, Rabinovich A, Friger M. Surgical pathologic fac tors in patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissec tion: association with administration of adjuvant radio therapy and effect on survival. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2006; 27(6):573-8.
9. Tanaka Y, Sawada S, Murata T. Relationship between lymph node metastases and prognosis in patients irradi ated postoperatively for carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1984; 23(6):455-9.
10. Tinga DJ, Timmer PR, Bouma J, Aalders JG. Prognostic significance of single versus multiple lymph node metas tases in cervical carcinoma stage IB. Gynecol Oncol. 1990 Nov; 39(2):175-80.
11. Novaković P, Mandić A, Vujkov T, et al. Radical hys terectomy for stage IB1 cervical carcinoma: lymph node metastasis as a prognostic factor. J BUON 2002;7(3):247- 50
12. Pieterse QD, Kenter GG, Gaarenstroom KN et al. The number of pelvic lymph nodes in the quality control and prognosis of radical hysterectomy for the treatment of cer vical cancer. EJSO 2007, 33:216-21
13. Macdonald OK, Chen J, Dodson M, Lee CM, Gaffney DK. Prognostic Significance of Histology and Positive Lymph Node Involvement Following Radical Hysterectomy in Carcinoma of the Cervix American Journal of Clinical Oncology Volume 32, Number 4, August 2009
14. Stehman FB, Ali S, DiSaia PJ. Node count and groin re currence in early vulvar cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Apr; 113(1):52-6.
15. Lutman CV, Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM et al. Pelvic lymph node count is an important prognostic variable for FIGO stage I and II endometrial carcinoma with high-risk his tology. Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Jul; 102(1):92-7.
16. Altorki NK, Zhou XK, Stiles B et al. Total number of re sected lymph nodes predicts survival in esophageal can cer. Ann Surg. 2008 Aug; 248(2):221-6.
17. Peyre CG, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR et al. The number of lymph nodes removed predicts survival in esophageal can cer: an international study on the impact of extent of sur gical resection. Ann Surg. 2008 Oct; 248(4):549-56.
18. Greenstein AJ, Litle VR, Swanson SJ, Divino CM, Packer S, Wisnivesky JP. Effect of the number of lymph nodes sampled on postoperative survival of lymph node-nega tive esophageal cancer. Cancer. 2008 Mar 15;112(6): 1239-46.
19. Terada KY, Morley GW, Roberts JA. Stage IB carcinoma of the cervix with lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol. 1988;3 1:389-395.
20. Sakuragi N, Satoh C, Tanaka T, et al. The incidence and clinical significance of paraaortic lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical cancer. Nippon Sanka Fujinka Gakkai Zasshi. 1990; 42:60-66 (abs).
21. Berman ML, Keys H, Creasman W, et al. Survival and patterns of recurrence in cervical cancer metastatic to pe riaortic lymph nodes (a Gynecologic Oncology Group study). Gynecol Oncol. 1984;19:8-16.
22. Hu Y, Hu C, Zhang H, Ping Y, Chen LQ. How does the number of resected lymph nodes influence TNM staging and prognosis for esophageal carcinoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Mar; 17(3):784-90.