Efficacy of Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy in Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Study


Objective: The prognostic impact for ovarian cancer treatment of employing a systematic para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy is still poorly defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of adding a para-aortic lymphadenectomy (PA) to the pelvic lymphadenectomy (PL), as compared with solely the pelvic lymphadenectomy. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of patient outcomes was conducted of ovarian cancer patients who underwent optimal debulking surgery, concurrent with either PA + PL or PL alone, between 2000 and 2009 at our Osaka General Medical Center. Results: One hundred twenty-one patients with ovarian cancer underwent surgery. Forty-four patients (36%) underwent optimal debulking surgery (all residual disease was <1 cm) concurrent with lymphadenectomy. Seventeen patients underwent PA + PL (PA group), and 27 patients underwent PL alone (PL group). There were no significant differences in terms of overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.82; p = 0.29) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.19 to 2.00; p = 0.40) between the PA group and the PL group. Both OS and PFS also failed to show significant differences, even when comparing them among 26 cases of FIGO stage I cases. Conclusions: Our data failed to show any prognostic improvement for ovarian cancer by adding para-aortic lymphadenectomy to the standard pelvic lymphadenectomy regimen.

Share and Cite:

H. Ugaki, Y. Komoto, R. Kakubari, E. Tanaka, H. Konishi, T. Kitai, S. Nakajima, M. Muraji, T. Enomoto and M. Takemura, "Efficacy of Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy in Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Study," Journal of Cancer Therapy, Vol. 4 No. 5A, 2013, pp. 28-32. doi: 10.4236/jct.2013.45A005.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] T. Matsuda, T. Marugame, K. I. Kamo, et al., “The Japan Cancer Surveillance Research Group. Cancer Incidence and Incidence Rates in Japan in 2005: Based on Data from 12 Population-Based Cancer Registries in the Monitoring of Cancer Incidence in Japan (MCIJ) Project,” Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2011, pp. 139-147. doi:10.1093/jjco/hyq169
[2] E. Burghardt, F. Girardi, M. Lahousen, et al., “Patterns of Pelvic and Paraaortic Lymph Node Involvement in Ovarian Cancer,” Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 40, No. 2, 1991, pp. 103-106. doi:10.1016/0090-8258(91)90099-Q
[3] I. Cass, A. J. Li, C. D. Runowicz, et al., “Pattern of Lymph Node Metastases in Clinically Unilateral Stage I Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Carcinomas,” Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 80, No. 1, 2001, pp. 56-61. doi:10.1006/gyno.2000.6027
[4] FIGO Cancer Committee, “Staging Announcements,” Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1986, pp. 383-385. doi:10.1016/0090-8258(86)90092-2
[5] P. B. Panici, G. Scambia, G. Baiocchi, et al., “Anatomical Study of Para-Aortic and Pelvic Lymph-Nodes in Gynecologic Malignancies,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 79, No. 4, 1992, pp. 498-502.
[6] G. Ferraris, A. Lanza, F. D’Addato, et al., “Techniques of Pelvic and Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy in the Surgical Treatment of Cervix Carcinoma,” European Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, Vol. 9, 1998, pp. 83-86.
[7] P. B. Panici, G. Scambia, G. Baiocchi, et al., “Technique and Feasibility of Systematic Paraaortic and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Gynecologic Malignancies, A Prospective Study,” International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, Vol. 1, No. 3, 1991, pp. 133-140. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1438.1991.tb00028.x
[8] C. T. Griffiths, “Surgical Resection of Tumor Bulk in the Primary Treatment of Ovarian Carcinoma,” The Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 42, 1975, pp. 101-104.
[9] N. F. Hacker, J. S. Berek, L. D. Lagasse, et al., “Primary Cytoreductive Surgery for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 61, No. 4, 1983, pp. 413-420
[10] E. L. Kaplan and P. Meier, “Non Parametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 53, No. 282, 1958, pp. 457-481. doi:10.1080/0162 1459.1958.10501452
[11] R. Peto, M. C. Pike, P. Armitage, et al., “Design and Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials Requiring Prolonged Observation of Each Patient. II. Analysis and Example,” British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1977, pp. 1-39. doi:10.1038/bjc.1977.1
[12] P. J. Di Saia and W. T. Creasman, “Clinical Gynecologic Oncology,” 6th Edition, Mosby, St. Louis, 2002.
[13] ASTEC Study Group, H. Kitchener, A. M. Swart, Q. Qian, et al., “Efficacy of Systematic Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Endometrial Cancer (MRC ASTECtrial): A Randomized Study,” Lancet, Vol. 373, No. 9658, 2009, pp. 125-136.
[14] P. B. Panici, A. Maggioni, N. Hacker, et al., “Systematic Aortic and Pelvic Lymphadenectomy versus Resection of Bulky Nodes only in Optimally Debulked Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” The Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 97, No. 8, 2005, pp. 560-566. doi:10.1093/jnci/dji102
[15] R. E. Bristow, R. S. Tomacruz, D. K. Armstrong, et al., “Survival Effect of Maximal Cytoreductive Surgery for Advanced Ovarian Carcinoma during Platinum Era: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2002, pp. 1248-1259. doi:10.1200/JCO.20.5.1248
[16] T. Onda, H. Yoshikawa, H. Yokota, et al., “Assessment of Metastases to Aortic and Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma. A Proposal for Essential Sites for Lymph Node Biopsy,” Cancer, Vol. 78, No. 4, 1996, pp. 803-808. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960815)78:4<803::AID-CNCR17>3.0.CO;2-Z

Copyright © 2021 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.