BJU international · 2026
Guideline of guidelines: pelvic lymph node dissection at time of radical prostatectomy.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Carll Jonathon, Walbaum Jonathan, Delgado Carlos, Berg Elena, Murphy Declan G, Perera Marlon, Adam Ahmed, Yaxley John, Lawrentschuk Nathan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive review, analysis and critique of guidelines from various oncological and urological organisations regarding the use pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for primary treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).
METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar and the official webpages of major urological and oncological societies were searched for PCa guidelines. Guidelines were assessed for recommendations and opinions regarding the use of PLND. A total of 15 guidelines were identified and included for this review.
RESULTS: There is consensus amongst guidelines that an extended template (ePLND), is the preferred templated when PLND is to be undertaken. The majority of guidelines acknowledge the lack of proven oncological benefit from PLND, and that the largest benefit is from improved staging information. However, there is significant divergence between the guidelines about which patients should undergo PLND. Some guidelines advocate for the abandonment of PLND altogether, whilst others adopt a risk-stratified approach, suggesting that patients should be offered PLND based on nomograms or clinical risk stratification.
CONCLUSION: Whilst ePLND is recommended by some guidelines for select patients undergoing RP, it remains a contentious topic with significant discordance between guidelines regarding patient selection. Given the lack of proven oncological benefit and significant morbidity from the procedure, careful selection is required. It is uncertain as to how pathological findings on PLND will change management given recent trends towards salvage rather than adjuvant radiotherapy, and improved preoperative staging with prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography/computed tomography.
METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar and the official webpages of major urological and oncological societies were searched for PCa guidelines. Guidelines were assessed for recommendations and opinions regarding the use of PLND. A total of 15 guidelines were identified and included for this review.
RESULTS: There is consensus amongst guidelines that an extended template (ePLND), is the preferred templated when PLND is to be undertaken. The majority of guidelines acknowledge the lack of proven oncological benefit from PLND, and that the largest benefit is from improved staging information. However, there is significant divergence between the guidelines about which patients should undergo PLND. Some guidelines advocate for the abandonment of PLND altogether, whilst others adopt a risk-stratified approach, suggesting that patients should be offered PLND based on nomograms or clinical risk stratification.
CONCLUSION: Whilst ePLND is recommended by some guidelines for select patients undergoing RP, it remains a contentious topic with significant discordance between guidelines regarding patient selection. Given the lack of proven oncological benefit and significant morbidity from the procedure, careful selection is required. It is uncertain as to how pathological findings on PLND will change management given recent trends towards salvage rather than adjuvant radiotherapy, and improved preoperative staging with prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography/computed tomography.