ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2021
Comparative study of perioperative and survival outcomes after video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and open inguinal lymph node dissection (O-ILND) in the management of inguinal lymph nodes in carcinoma of the penis.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Initial experience and technical description of robot-assisted single-port laparoscopic bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection for penile cancer: a report of two cases.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Penile cancer and lymph node management: a call for standardization.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Video-endoscopic versus open inguinal lymphadenectomy: Long-term oncological outcomes in penile cancer.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Review
- Minimally Invasive Management of Inguinal Lymph Nodes in Penile Cancer: Recent Progress and Remaining Challenges.Cancers · 2024Review
- New EAU/ASCO guideline recommendations on sentinel node biopsy for penile cancer and remaining challenges from a nuclear medicine perspective.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Video-endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) oncological and surgical benefits compared to open inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND).Journal of men's health · 2024Article
- Inguinal lymphadenectomy in penile cancer patients: a comparison between open and video endoscopic approach in a multicenter setting.Journal of basic and clinical physiology and pharmacology · 2023Article
- Clinical Application of Noninflating Video-Endoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Nursing of Vulvar Cancer Radical Operation Combined with Laparoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection.Emergency medicine international · 2022Article
- Saphenous-sparing Ascending Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection Using a Leg Approach: Surgical Technique and Perioperative and Pathological Outcomes.European urology open science · 2022Article
- Minimal invasive approaches in lymph node management of carcinoma of penis: A review.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
- Long-term oncological and surgical outcomes after Video Endoscopic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy (VEIL) in patients with penile cancer.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Open inguinal lymph node dissection (O-ILND) is the gold standard in the management of lymph nodes in carcinoma penis; however, video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) is performed in some centers. Our primary objective is to compare perioperative and survival outcomes in patients undergoing VEIL with O-ILND, as very few studies have reported long-term survival outcomes till date. We analyzed patients who underwent O-ILND and VEIL (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) from January 2009 to January 2020 in our institute for carcinoma of the penis. Patient details, perioperative complications, and survival outcomes were analyzed. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed by logistic regression and survival outcomes by log-rank and Cox regression methods. We analyzed 79 patients (32 O-ILND, 47 VEIL) with a median follow-up of 51 (IQR 25.5-75.5) and 42 months (IQR 21-62). Wound complications were common in O-ILND group (65.6%) compared to VEIL group (27.7%) (p = 0.001), predominantly skin flap necrosis in 14 groins (23.73%) after O-ILND and none after VEIL. Median overall survival was 80 and 88 months (p = 0.840) with five-year survival of 65% and 66.8% (p = 0.636) and five-year DSS of 76.6% and 73.9% (p = 0.96) in O-ILND and VEIL, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that grade and pathological node status were significant (HR-2.650, p = 0.040; HR-3.218, p = 0.024) factors for survival. The retrospective nature of the study design is the limitation. Management of inguinal lymph nodes in carcinoma penis by VEIL is safe, associated with lesser wound-related complications, and equivalent survival outcomes compared to O-ILND. It should be considered as an alternative option for inguinal lymph node dissection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.