title: Post-Chemotherapy Robotic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection: Institutional Experience.
abstract: There is little literature on robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RRPLND) in the difficult post-chemotherapy (PC) setting. We report on the outcome of RRPLND in patients with PC-residual masses.
  
  
  
  Between 2011 and 2015, we performed 12 PC-RRPLND. Mean patient age was 37.8 years. Mean body mass index was 30.78. Nine (75%) patients had nonseminomatus germ cell tumor (NSGCT) and three (25%) patients had seminoma tumors. Cancer stage was III in six (50%), II-C in three (25%), II-B in two (16.7%), and II-A in one (8.03%). International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) prognostic classification in the NSGCT was good in six, intermediate in two, and poor in one, and was good in the three seminoma patients.
  
  
  
  The procedure was completed effectively in 11 (91.7%) patients. Mean operative time was 312 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss was 475 mL. Mean hospital stay was 3.2 days. Mean number of lymph node excised was 12. Six of the excised masses were ≥5 cm (N3), largest was 7.5 cm. Pathology showed teratoma in five (45.5%), benign/necrosis in five (45.5%), and viable germ cells in one (9%). Major complication (Clavien ≥3) occurred in one patient and minor (Clavien ≤2) in two. Antegrade ejaculation was preserved in eight patients and in one could not be assessed. At a median follow-up of 31 months, no infield or outfield relapses occurred.
  
  
  
  Robotic PC-retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is technically feasible and with acceptable morbidity. It is associated with low blood loss and short hospital stay. More research is needed to assess the long-term outcome and to compare standard open RPLND.
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Urology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences , Little Rock, Arkansas.|2 Department of Urology, Ain Shams University , Cairo, Egypt .
authors.forename: Mohamed H
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Kamel
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Urology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences , Little Rock, Arkansas.
authors.forename: Nathan
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Littlejohn
authors.affiliation: 3 Department of Pathology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences , Little Rock, Arkansas.
authors.forename: Michelle
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Cox
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Urology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences , Little Rock, Arkansas.|2 Department of Urology, Ain Shams University , Cairo, Egypt .
authors.forename: Ehab A
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Eltahawy
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Urology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences , Little Rock, Arkansas.
authors.forename: Rodney
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Davis
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D015992:Body Mass Index; D006801:Humans; D007902:Length of Stay; D008197:Lymph Node Excision / Q000379:methods*; D008198:Lymph Nodes / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000601:surgery*; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D009373:Neoplasms, Germ Cell and Embryonal / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D061646:Operative Time; D011184:Postoperative Period; D011379:Prognosis; D012187:Retroperitoneal Space / Q000601:surgery*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D065287:Robotic Surgical Procedures; D013736:Testicular Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult