Risk factors for symptomatic lymphoceles in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection: What we learned after more than 350 cases
- PMID: 40458578
- PMCID: PMC12126951
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2024.08.002
Risk factors for symptomatic lymphoceles in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection: What we learned after more than 350 cases
Abstract
Objective: We investigated patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND), analyzing the prevalence and risk factors associated with symptomatic lymphoceles (SLCs).
Methods: We evaluated 354 consecutive patients who underwent RARP with PLND by our team between June 2016 and December 2022. After analyzing the prevalence of SLCs, patients were divided into two groups, with and without SLCs. The variables were age, body mass index (BMI), prostate-specific antigen, surgery time, blood loss, length of stay, International Society of Urological Pathology score in the pathology, and the number of lymph nodes removed. These variables were compared between these groups using the Chi-square test and Student's t-test, according to the type of the variable. In all analyses, a significance level of <0.05 was considered.
Results: The prevalence of SLCs in this sample of patients undergoing RARP with PLND was 2.0% (7/354), which is slightly lower than the minimum rate reported in the literature. In our analysis, BMI (p=0.041), the number of lymph nodes removed (p=0.007), and length of hospital stay (p=0.007) were factors associated with the presence of SLCs.
Conclusion: The prevalence of SLCs in patients undergoing RARP with PLND is approximately 2.0%. Higher BMI, greater number of lymph nodes removed, and longer length of hospital stay are factors associated with the presence of SLCs.
Keywords: Lymphadenectomy; Lymphocele; Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; Symptomatic lymphocele.
© 2025 Editorial Office of Asian Journal of Urology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.Vé.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
-
- Liss M.A., Lusch A., Morales B., Beheshti N., Skarecky D., Narula N., et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: 5-year oncological and biochemical outcomes. J Urol. 2012;188:2205–2210. - PubMed
-
- Dell'Oglio P., Mottrie A., Mazzone E. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open radical prostatectomy: latest evidences on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes. Curr Opin Urol. 2020;30:73–78. - PubMed
-
- Mottet N., van den Bergh R.C.N., Briers E., Van den Broeck T., Cumberbatch M.G., De Santis M., et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer—2024 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2024;79:243–262. - PubMed
-
- Sanda M.G., Cadeddu J.A., Kirkby E., Chen R.C., Crispino T., Fontanarosa J., et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part II: recommended approaches and details of specific care options. J Urol. 2018;199:990–997. - PubMed
-
- Solberg A., Angelsen A., Bergan U., Haugen O.A., Viset T., Klepp O. Frequency of lymphoceles after open and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003;37:218–221. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources