Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Clinical Research
  • Published:

Indication to pelvic lymph nodes dissection for prostate cancer: the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging when the risk of lymph nodes invasion according to Briganti updated nomogram is <5%

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 21, pages 85–91 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

The Briganti updated nomogram (BN) is the most popular predictive model aiming to predict the presence of lymph node invasion (LNI) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa), but it lacks information obtained by preoperative imaging.

The primary aim of the study was to evaluate the role of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) in the indication to perform pelvic lymph nodes dissection (PLND) or not in patients with risk of LNI according to BN below 5%.

Methods

Since March 2012 and September 2016, 310 patients who underwent a preoperative mp-MRI for staging purpose and subsequent robot-assisted extended PLND (RAEPLND) were retrospectively evaluated. Mp-MRIs were prospectively analyzed by two experienced radiologists. The imaging parameters analyzed were the presence of extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicles invasion (SVI) and predominant Gleason pattern 4 (pG4). All patients underwent RAEPLND by two experienced surgeons with a standardized technique. A dedicated uropathologist performed all pathological analysis. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used in order to identify the predictors of LNI in patients with PCa.

Results

In the overall population, 57 (18.4%) patients had histologically proven pN1 disease. 48/250 patients (19.2%) with a risk of LNI ≥5% as calculated by the BN were staged pN1 at final histopathological analysis. 9/60 patients (15.0%) with a risk of LNI <5% as calculated by BN, who underwent RAEPLND anyway according to the findings at mp-MRI, were staged pN1 at final histopathological analysis. At multivariate logistic regression analysis, all the three mp-MRI parameters were significant independent predictors of LNI after RAEPLND.

Conclusions

The role of mp-MRI seemed to be crucial in patients with a risk of LNI <5% as calculated by the BN. The presence of ECE, SVI, or pG4 at mp-MRI was found to be an independent predictor of LNI by itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Budiharto T, Joniau S, Lerut E, Van Den Bergh L, Mottaghy F, Deroose CM, et al. Prospective evaluation of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the nodal staging of prostate cancer with a high risk of lymph node metastases. Eur Urol. 2011;60:125–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Conti A, Santoni M, Burattini L, Scarpelli M, Mazzucchelli R, Galosi AB, et al. Update on histopathological evaluation of lymphadenectomy specimens from prostate cancer patients. World J Urol. 2017;35:517–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Orvieto MA, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel VR. Incidence of lymphoceles after robot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection. BJU Int. 2011;108:1185–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Eifler JB, Levinson AW, Hyndman ME, Trock BJ, Pavlovich CP. Pelvic lymph node dissection is associated with symptomatic venous thromboembolism risk during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2011;185:1661–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Keegan KA, Cookson MS. Complications of pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2011;12:203–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pini G, Matin SF, Suardi N, Desai M, Gill I, Porter J, et al. Robot assisted lymphadenectomy in urology: pelvic, retroperitoneal and inguinal. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2017;69:38–55.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Albisinni S, Aoun F, LE Dinh D, Zanaty M, Hawaux E, Peltier A, et al. Comparing conventional laparoscopic to robotic-assisted extended pelvic lymph node dissection in men with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer: a matched-pair analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2017;69:101–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, Burnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. AUA Prostate Cancer Clinical Guideline Update Panel. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;177:2106–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65:124–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F, Capitanio U, Gallina A, Suardi N, et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol. 2012;61:480–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kiechle J, Pahwa S, Gulani V, Kanaan G, Sedelaar J, Ponsky L. Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer: what the urologist needs to know. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2015;67:201–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. de Rooij M, Hamoen EH, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for local staging of prostate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70:233–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Soylu FN, Peng Y, Jiang Y, Wang S, Schmid-Tannwald C, Sethi I, et al. Seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer: evaluation by using multiparametric endorectal MR imaging. Radiology. 2013;267:797–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bittencourt LK, Barentsz JO, de Miranda LC, Gasparetto EL, Prostate MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T correlates better with prostatectomy Gleason Grades than TRUS-guided biopsies in peripheral zone tumours. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:468–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. European Society of Urogenital Radiology. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:746–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sciarra A, Barentsz J, Bjartell A, Eastham J, Hricak H, Panebianco V, et al. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: how they are changing the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2011;59:962–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2015;68:1045–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Porpiglia F, Russo F, Manfredi M, Mele F, Fiori C, Bollito E, et al. The roles of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, PCA3 and prostate health index-which is the best predictor of prostate cancer after a negative biopsy? J Urol. 2014;192:60–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Porpiglia F, De Luca S, Bertolo R, Passera R, Mele F, Manfredi M, et al. Robot-assisted extended pelvic lymph nodes dissection for prostate cancer: personal surgical technique and outcomes. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41:1209–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Prostate Cancer Nomograms Pre-Radical Prostatectomy. (2016) https://www.mskcc.org/nomograms/prostate/pre-op/coefficients. Accessed 20 December 2016.

  21. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Zanni G, Scattoni V, Valiquette L, et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion among patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and an extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Eur Urol. 2006;49:1019–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hövels AM, Heesakkers RA, Adang EM, Jager GJ, Strum S, Hoogeveen YL, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2008;63:387–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P, Picchio M, Corti B, Briganti A, et al. 11C-choline positron emission tomography/ computerized tomography for preoperative lymph-node staging in intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer: comparison with clinical staging nomograms. Eur Urol. 2008;54:392–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Feng TS, Sharif-Afshar AR, Wu J, Li Q, Luthringer D, Saouaf R, et al. Multiparametric MRI improves accuracy of clinical nomograms for predicting extracapsular extension of prostate cancer. Urology. 2015;86:332–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Porpiglia F, Russo F, Manfredi M, Mele F, Fiori C, Regge D. Preoperative prostate biopsy and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: reliability in detecting prostate cancer. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41:124–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Thoeny HC, Froehlich JM, Triantafyllou M, Huesler J, Bains LJ, Vermathen P, et al. Metastases in normal-sized pelvic lymph nodes: detection with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 2014;273:125–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Park SY, Shin SJ, Jung DC, Cho NH, Choi YD, Rha KH, et al. PI-RADS version 2: quantitative analysis aids reliable interpretation of diffusion-weighted imaging for prostate cancer. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:2776–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

All the Authors thank Daniele Amparore, MD, for assistance with paper illustration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, TO, Italy

    Francesco Porpiglia, Matteo Manfredi, Fabrizio Mele, Riccardo Bertolo, Cristian Fiori & Stefano De Luca

  2. Division of Pathology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, TO, Italy

    Enrico Bollito

  3. Division of Radiology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, TO, Italy

    Dario Gned & Agostino De Pascale

  4. Department of Radiology, Candiolo Cancer Institute - FPO, IRCCS, Candiolo, TO, Italy

    Filippo Russo

  5. Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Turin, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, Torino, TO, Italy

    Roberto Passera

Authors
  1. Francesco Porpiglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matteo Manfredi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabrizio Mele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Riccardo Bertolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Enrico Bollito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dario Gned
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Agostino De Pascale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Filippo Russo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Roberto Passera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Cristian Fiori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Stefano De Luca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Porpiglia.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Porpiglia, F., Manfredi, M., Mele, F. et al. Indication to pelvic lymph nodes dissection for prostate cancer: the role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging when the risk of lymph nodes invasion according to Briganti updated nomogram is <5%. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 21, 85–91 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-017-0026-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-017-0026-5

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links