
==== Front
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992)
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992)
ramb
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
0104-4230
1806-9282
Associação Médica Brasileira

39292092
10.1590/1806-9282.20240696
00608
Original Article
Robotic sentinel lymph node dissection experiences in endometrial cancer at our tertiary cancer treatment institution
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6723-1773
Şimşek Erkan Investigation Methodology Software Writing – review & editing 1 *
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7788-9755
Gündüz Sadık Conceptualization Formal Analysis 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1427-4630
Yıldız Özge Akdeniz Conceptualization Formal Analysis Software 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3259-1813
Serhanoğlu Zinar Formal Analysis Resources 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8679-2699
Yaşar Levent Investigation Supervision 1
1 University of Health Sciences Turkey, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology – İstanbul, Turkey.
2 Kırıkhan State Hospital, Gynecology and Obstetrics Clinic – Antakya, Turkey.
*Corresponding author: dr.erkann@hotmail.com
Conflicts of interest: the authors declare there is no conflicts of interest.

16 9 2024
2024
70 9 e2024069616 5 2024
05 6 2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
SUMMARY

OBJECTIVE:

In endometrial cancer surgery, sentinel lymph node dissection is used instead of staging surgery, particularly in advanced disease that is limited to the uterus. The aim of this study is to evaluate our practice of robotic sentinel lymph node dissection, which is applied to endometrial cancer patients in our tertiary cancer treatment center, according to the current literature, and to share our own data.

METHODS:

Included in our analysis are patients who underwent robotic sentinel lymph node dissection for endometrial cancer utilizing indocyanine green in our center between January 2018 and January 2024.

RESULTS:

In all, of the 93 endometrial carcinoma patients who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy, 63 were classified as low-risk, while 30 were high-risk according to the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We found sentinel lymph nodes in both low-risk and high-risk patients, with an overall sensitivity of 96.32% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.12–99.71), specificity of 100% (95%CI, 92.20–99.8), negative predictive value of 96.72% (95%CI, 87.03–99.89), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.06 (95%CI, 0.01–0.36).

CONCLUSION:

After evaluating our data retrospectively, we determined that we were compatible with the current literature.

KEYWORDS:

Sentinel lymph node
Endometrium cancer
Robot assisted surgery
==== Body
pmcINTRODUCTION

Endometrial carcinoma (EC) is the most prevalent gynecologic cancer and the fourth most common malignancy among women in countries with high incomes 1 . In 2020, the world saw 417,367 new diagnoses and 97,370 new fatalities 2 .

Previously, treatment for EC was hysterectomy, bilateral sapingo-ophorectomy, and pelvic or pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection after surgery, according to the grade and pathology of cancer, both to determine the adjuvant treatment modality and to increase surveillance 3,4 . As a result of the latest studies 5–8 in the literature and with the recommendation of NCCN guidelines 2023 (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) 8 , hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) are now required in EC in all endometrioid grades (grade 1-2-3) and non-endometrioid pathology results for surgical treatment, and in the presence of a cancer determined to be limited to the uterus only in imaging methods.

In the treatment of EC, the evaluation of sentinel lymph node (SLN) is thought to be more appropriate in terms of the disease's progression than the evaluation of pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes 8 . SLND is a less invasive technique for finding occult metastases in normal-appearing lymph nodes while avoiding full pelvic lymph node surgery 9 . When compared with full lymphadenectomy, this method detects more metastasis with fewer morbidities, such as intraoperative neurovascular damage or postoperative lymphedema 10 .

The Department of Gynecologic Oncology at Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey, is a tertiary referral center for malignant gynecological surgery. Robotic surgery (Da Vinci Xi robotic system®, Intuitive Surgical Inc.) has been used since 2015 and is the preferred surgical approach for women with endometrial cancer unless contraindicated by uterine size, suspected disseminated disease, or anesthesia reasons.

The primary goal of this study is to share our findings on SLND with the literature. The other goal is to compare our own practice and experiences on this topic to the literature.

METHODS

The study is a retrospective and single-center investigation. Patients who underwent robotic surgery for endometrial cancer in our center between January 2018 and January 2024 were included in our study. In these patients, SLND was attempted using ICG (indocyanine green).

Before robotic surgery, our patients’ malignancies were required to be limited to the endometrium only; the size of the uterus should be suitable for vaginal removal; the patient should be in the maximum Trendelenburg position suitable for robotic surgery; and the lungs should be able to handle the carbon dioxide pressure for anesthesia.

By ruling out extrauterine sickness, high-risk tumors underwent further imaging exams (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography). Women with high-risk endometrial cancer (non-endometrioid histology, FIGO (The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) Grade 3, non-diploid flow cytometry, myometrial invasion greater than 50%, or cervical invasion) were scheduled for a complete pelvic and infrarenal paraaortic lymphadenectomy after an initial removal of SLNs. Furthermore, an infracolic omentectomy was performed in cases of non-endometrioid histology. Patients without any high-risk factors were allocated to the SLN biopsy. Following the NCCN 2023 guidelines, only SLND and suspicious bulky lymph node dissection are performed in all pathologies limited to the uterus.

A 25-mg vial of ICG powder was diluted in 20 mL of sterile water, and 4 mL of the solution was injected into the cervix at 3 and 9 o'clock locations, with 1 mL deep (1 cm) and 1 mL superficial (3–4 mm). The dye was administered slowly, at a pace of 10 s per location. The endoscopic systems compatible with indocyanine green were used in the da Vinci Xi robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, California) for robotic surgeries. Mapping and dissection of the SLN were performed by experienced gynecologist oncologists working in our European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) accredited center, as described in the NCCN guidelines.

The institutional review board (University of Health Sciences, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Education and Research Hospital, Turkey, August 8, 2022) approved the study (Approval no. 2022/258).

The algorithm's performance was measured using sensitivity, false negative rate, and negative predictive value. It is impossible to report specificity, positive predictive value, or false positive rate because all positive SLNs must also be positive for lymph node metastasis (LNM). True positivity in LNM patients was characterized by a positive SLN or algorithm. A chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. The descriptive information was given using the median (min–max) for continuous variables and the frequency (%) for categorical variables. p-values<0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata 9.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX).

RESULTS

In all, of the 93 EC patients who underwent SLN biopsy, 63 were classified as low-risk, while 30 were high-risk, according to the ESGO and NCCN guidelines. There were no complications following the ICG injection, nor were there any surgical complications associated with the SLN biopsy. The average surgery duration from placing the robotic trocar to skin closure was 121 min (range 95–245). Median blood loss was 60 (range 40–150) mL with no blood transfusions administered, and two-thirds of the patients had postoperative hospital stays of 2 days.

According to our records and the surgical process, the anesthesiologist determined that three of our patients were not suited for robotic surgery. It was stated that the lung capacities of three of our patients were not suitable for robotic surgery because their chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and BMI (body mass index) were>45. Table 1 summarizes demographic information for the study population.

Table 1 Demographic and clinical characteristics.

	Median	Range	
Age (years)	62	36–80	
Body mass index (kg/m 2 ) (BMI)	31	27–45	
Hospital stay in days after surgery	2	1–7	
Operation time (min)	121	95–245	
Blood loss (mL)	60	40–150	
Tumor size (mm)	8	6–80	
Depth of myometrial invasion	
	N: 93	Percentage	
No infiltration	3	3	
<%50	66	70	
>%50	22	25	
Presence of lymphovascular space invasion	18	19	
Histology	
	N: 93	Percentage	
Endometrioid	68	73	
Clear cell	9	9.6	
Serous	6	6.4	
Mix type (squamous adenocarcinoma)	8	7	
Carcinosarcoma	2	2	
Müsinöz adenoca	2	2	
Sentinel lymph node detection (SLND) rates according to risk and body mass index	
Risk of endometrium carcinoma	N: 93	Percentage	Number of SLND	Percentage	
Low risk (FIGO Grade 1–2 endometrioid type)	63	67	65	100	
Hıgh risk (FIGO Grade 3, non endometrioid type)
(Two clear cell cases occurred from the polyp base
Five endometrioid Ca were Grade 3)	30	33	28	93	
Patients body mass index	Number of patients	Percentage	Number of SLND	Percentage	
Body mass index<31	55	59	55	100	
Body mass index>31	38	41	36	95	
Total	93	100	91	97.8	

Sentinel lymph nodes were identified in 91 out of 93 patients, resulting in a 97.8% total detection rate. Of the 91 patients with at least one SLN discovered, 89 had pelvic SLNs, resulting in a 97.8% detection rate. The detection rate was 87% (81 cases) for bilateral pelvic SLNs and 10.7% (10 cases) for unilateral pelvic SLNs, with six and four in the left and right hemipelvis, respectively. In four patients, there were three presacral and one internal iliac SLNs along with pelvic SLNs. In addition, by re-injecting ICG 10 min later, we were able to identify the SLN in two of our patients that we could not identify unilaterally after the first ICG injection.

After analyzing the distribution of anatomical places where SLNs were found, we discovered that it was 50% in the right and left obturatory areas, 47% in the right, and 48% in the left in both external iliac artery locations. Table 2 illustrates our detection rates for SLN, their anatomical locations, and metastatic lymph nodes.

Table 2 Sentinel lymph node (SLN) characteristics.

Detection rates of SLN	N: 93	Percentage	
Overall	91	97.8	
Bilaterally	81	87	
Unilaterally	10	10.9	
Undetected	2	2.1	
Anatomical location of SLNs in endometrial cancer	
Site of sentinel lymph node localization	Left	Percentage	Right	Percentage	
Obturator area	41	50	42	50	
External iliac area	39	48	40	47	
Presacral area	1	2	2	3	
Common iliac area	1		-		
The distribution of risk categories and corresponding rates of sentinel lymph node metastatic disease	
Positive metastatic SLN	Number of patients	Percentage	Number of metastatic lymph node	Percentage	
Low risk (FIGO Grade 1–2 endometrioid type)	63	68	4	6	
High risk (FIGO Grade 3, non endometrioid type)
(Two clear cell cases occurred from the polyp base
Five endometrioid Ca were Grade 3)	30	32	10	34	
Total	93	100	14	15	

Among the 63 patients with low risk, 65 had SLNs detected, and 4 had positive SLNs [3 micrometastasis and 1 isole tumor cell (ITC)] (6%). The SLN detection rate was 100% in this group. In the high-risk group, the overall SLN detection rate was 93% (28 cases), and all patients received a complete lymphadenectomy. SLNs were positive in 35.7% (10/28) of cases. The number of cases with positive SLNs in the last pathology report was defined as 60% (6/10) macrometastasis and 40% (4/10) micrometastasis. One of every two patients in whom we were unable to detect an SLN had clear cell carcinoma, whereas the other had grade 3 EC. Both patients had metastatic pelvic lymph nodes. Among patients with no pelvic nodes, 1.3% (1/77) experienced isolated paraaortic lymph node metastasis. Details of patients with metastatic SLN are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Characteristics of patients with sentinel lymph node metastasis.

No.	Age	Histology	Pre-operative grade	Post-operative grade	Myometrial invasion	SLN	LND in algorithm steps	Other LNM sites	
1	47	Endometrioid	1	2	>50%	Isole Tumor cell	Bilateral Pelvic	None	
2	54	Endometrioid	2	2	<50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic	None	
3	59	Endometrioid	2	3	>50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic + Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/14 positive	
4	49	Endometrioid	2	3	>50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 1/12 positive	
5	62	Endometrioid	2	3	>50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 2/11, paraaortic 2/14 positive	
6	58	Endometrioid	3	3	>50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/11, positive	
7	65	Endometrioid	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/16, paraaortic 1/7 positive	
8	49	Endometrioid	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 1/8 positive	
9	67	Endometrioid	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/11 positive	
10	65	Serous	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/15, paraaortic 1/9 positive	
11	58	Serous	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 2/9 positive	
12	62	Serous	3	3	<50%	Micrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 3/14 positive	
13	55	Clear cell	3	3	<50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 2/11 positive	
14	65	Clear cell	3	3	>50%	Macrometastasis	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Pelvic 2/10 positive	
15	56	Endometrioid	3	3	>50%	None	Bilateral Pelvic+ Paraaortic	Paraaortic 2/8 positive	
Note: SLN: sentinel lymph node; LND: lymph node dissection; LNM: lymph node metastasis.

The majority of the patients with SLN positive (10/14, 72%) are in advanced stages. In addition, isolated tumor cells were found in only one patient at an early stage. The histopathologic outcomes of SLNs and nodes obtained during systematic lymphadenectomy were compared. We found SLNs in both low-risk and high-risk patients, with an overall sensitivity of 96.32% (95%CI, 85.12–99.71), specificity of 100% (95%CI, 92.20–99.8), negative predictive value of 96.72% (95%CI, 87.03–99.89), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.06 (95%CI, 0.01–0.36).

DISCUSSION

We conducted this study to discuss our own experiences and compare our findings to the existing literature on the robotic-assisted sentinel lymph determination technique utilizing endometrial treatment (ICG). Our SLND rates were similar to those reported in the current literature 11,12 . It was observed that our bilateral SLND rates, which especially increase the success of SLND, were similar to the literature 13,14 . Our false-negative SLN evaluation rate, which is essentially the most crucial marker that changes the patient's stage, was determined to be 1.3% (one patient). This rate is within the boundaries established in the literature 6 .

Patients were separated into two groups based on their BMI: <31 and >31, with 41% (38 patients) falling into the second group. The group also includes two (2%) patients in whom we could not detect SLNs. Previous research has suggested that the difficulty in finding SLNs in obese patients stems from both the difficulties of anatomical dissection and the high risk of bleeding during dissection 15,16 .

It has been reported that systemic lymphadenectomy does not reduce lymphatic metastatic recurrence in the course of the disease after surgery 17 . Our negative predictive value for sentinel lymph node discovery was 97.8%, indicating that sentinel lymph node dissection can fully replace systemic lymphadenectomy.

We predicted that we have rates close to those in the literature due to the fact that we use only ICG as a dye to detect sentinel lymph nodes and that the possible SLN is removed after determining the afferent and efferent lymphatic channels with robotic surgery 18 . We believe that watching the lymphatic channels during surgery and entering the anatomical locations where the SLN can be located increases the chances of successfully finding the sentinel lymph node, particularly in obese individuals. Following the literature's guidance 19 , we were able to find the unilateral SLN in two of our patients who had previously gone undetected by reinjecting 10 min later.

Our SLND rates in early and late-stage endometrial cancer are consistent with the literature 7–20 . After evaluating the anatomical locations of the SLNs we determined, we determined that we reached the locations and rates previously stated in the literature 10–18 . The average surgery time for robotic surgery and SLND, the amount of bleeding, and the patient's hospital stay are consistent with previous research findings 21 .

During robotic SLN sampling, there were patients who were obese, particularly those with low lung capacity (three patients), in the maximum Trendelenburg position at a slope of 32%, and due to the CO2 pressure in the abdomen, we had difficulty during surgery and were unable to perform it. In our clinic, we perform SLND surgeries using laparoscopic and VNOTES (Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery) techniques for our patients with endometrial cancer. We performed operations on our patients with high BMI and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease without any problems with anesthesia. We have experienced the accuracy of the opinions in the most recently published study 22 . We intend to report on these experiences in a separate study.

While the limitations of our study are that it is retrospective and the number of cases is low, the fact that it is single-centered, performed by the same surgical team, and our SLN detection rates and anatomical locations are similar to those in the literature indicate the strength of our study.

CONCLUSION

Sentinel lymph node dissection in endometrial cancer is about to become the mainstay of surgical treatment in a disease limited to the uterus. It is pleasing for us to have data similar to the literature in this process.

Funding: none.
==== Refs
REFERENCES

1 Siegel RL Miller KD Fuchs HE Jemal A Cancer statistics, 2022 CA Cancer J Clin 2022 72 1 7 33 10.3322/caac.21708 35020204
2 Sung H Ferlay J Siegel RL Laversanne M Soerjomataram I Jemal A Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA Cancer J Clin 2021 71 3 209 249 10.3322/caac.21660 33538338
3 Concin N Matias-Guiu X Vergote I Cibula D Mirza MR Marnitz S ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma Int J Gynecol Cancer 2021 31 1 12 39 10.1136/ijgc-2020-002230 33397713
4 NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology Uterine neoplasms. Version 2 2020
5 Rossi EC Kowalski LD Scalici J Cantrell L Schuler K Hanna RK A comparison of sentinel lymph node biopsy to lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging (FIRES trial): a multicentre, prospective, cohort study Lancet Oncol 2017 18 3 384 392 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30068-2 28159465
6 Persson J Salehi S Bollino M Lönnerfors C Falconer H Geppert B Pelvic sentinel lymph node detection in high-risk endometrial cancer (SHREC-trial)-the final step towards a paradigm shift in surgical staging Eur J Cancer 2019 116 77 85 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.04.025 31181536
7 Marchocki Z Cusimano MC Vicus D Pulman K Rouzbahman M Mirkovic J Diagnostic accuracy of frozen section and patterns of nodal spread in high grade endometrial cancer: a secondary outcome of the SENTOR prospective cohort study Gynecol Oncol 2023 173 41 48 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.04.004 37075495
8 Abu-Rustum N Yashar C Arend R Barber E Bradley K Brooks R Uterine neoplasms, version 1.2023, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2023 21 2 181 209 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0006 36791750
9 Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R Sentinel lymph node mapping for endometrial cancer Pelvic cancer surgery: modern breakthroughs and future advances 2015 12 305 313
10 Bogani G Murgia F Ditto A Raspagliesi F Sentinel node mapping vs. lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Gynecol Oncol 2019 153 3 676 683 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.03.254 30952370
11 Lecointre L Lodi M Faller É Boisramé T Agnus V Baldauf JJ Diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of sentinel lymph node sampling in endometrial cancer at high risk of recurrence: a meta-analysis J Clin Med 2020 9 12 3874 3874 10.3390/jcm9123874 33260511
12 Fan MS Qiu KX Wang DY Wang H Zhang WW Yan L Risk factors associated with false negative rate of sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Front Oncol 2024 14 1391267 1391267 10.3389/fonc.2024.1391267 38634055
13 Cusimano MC Vicus D Pulman K Maganti M Bernardini MQ Bouchard-Fortier G Assessment of sentinel lymph node biopsy vs lymphadenectomy for intermediate- and high-grade endometrial cancer staging JAMA Surg 2021 156 2 157 164 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.5060 33175109
14 Tal O Grinstein E Goshen E Oksman Y Lorberboym M Elyashiv O Anatomic asymmetry in sentinel lymph node detection in endometrial cancer J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021 28 8 1531 1535 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.12.029 33373726
15 Matanes E Eisenberg N Amajoud Z Gupta V Yasmeen A Ismail S Sentinel lymph node sampling as an alternative to lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrial cancer and obesity J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2021 43 10 1136.e1 1144.e1 10.1016/j.jogc.2021.04.014 33984524
16 Taşkın S Sarı ME Altın D Ersöz CC Gökçe A Yüksel S Risk factors for failure of sentinel lymph node mapping using indocyanine green/near-infrared fluorescent imaging in endometrial cancer Arch Gynecol Obstet 2019 299 6 1667 1672 10.1007/s00404-019-05137-5 30927059
17 Li H Dong Y Dai Y Wang Z Wang J A detailed analysis of lymph node recurrence in endometrial carcinoma Transl Cancer Res 2022 11 7 2217 2224 10.21037/tcr-21-2588 35966308
18 Bollino M Geppert B Lönnerfors C Falconer H Salehi S Persson J Pelvic sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer-a simplified algorithm based on histology and lymphatic anatomy Int J Gynecol Cancer 2020 30 3 339 345 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000935 32075897
19 Maramai M Achilarre MT Aloisi A Betella I Bogliolo S Garbi A Cervical re-injection of indocyanine green to improve sentinel lymph node detection in endometrial cancer Gynecol Oncol 2021 162 1 38 42 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.04.026 33906784
20 Cabrera S Gómez-Hidalgo NR García-Pineda V Bebia V Fernández-González S Alonso P Accuracy and survival outcomes after national implementation of sentinel lymph node biopsy in early stage endometrial cancer Ann Surg Oncol 2023 30 12 7653 7662 10.1245/s10434-023-14065-3 37633852
21 Persson J Geppert B Lönnerfors C Bollino M Måsbäck A Description of a reproducible anatomically based surgical algorithm for detection of pelvic sentinel lymph nodes in endometrial cancer Gynecol Oncol 2017 147 1 120 125 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.07.131 28751118
22 Matak L Šimičević M Dukić B Matak M Baekelandt J vNOTES surgical staging for endometrial carcinoma in overweight patients: a case series Arch Gynecol Obstet 2024 309 6 2829 2832 10.1007/s00404-024-07466-6 38578545
