An Analysis of the Risk Factors and Management of Lymphocele after Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies

Hee Yeon Kim; Jae Wook Kim; Sung Hoon Kim; Young Tae Kim; Jae Hoon Kim

doi:10.4143/crt.2004.36.6.377

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 36(6); 2004 > Article

Original Article An Analysis of the Risk Factors and Management of Lymphocele after Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies: Hee Yeon Kim, M.D.¹, Jae Wook Kim, M.D.^1,2,3, Sung Hoon Kim, M.D.^1,2, Young Tae Kim, M.D.^1,2, Jae Hoon Kim, M.D.^1,2; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2004;36(6):377-383.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2004.36.6.377
Published online: December 31, 2004

¹Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

²Institute of Women's Life Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

³BK-21 Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Correspondence: Jae Wook Kim, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 134 Sinchon-dong, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea. (Tel) +82-2-361-5490, (Fax) +82-2-313-8357, shkim70@yumc.yonsei.ac.kr

• Received: November 4, 2004 • Accepted: December 6, 2004

18,411 Views
154 Download
75 Crossref

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract

Objectives
The incidence and risk factors of lymphocele development after pelvic lymphadenectomy were evaluated and its management investigated.
Materials and Methods
This retrospective study was carried out on 264 patients who received a pelvic lymphadenectomy, between March 1999 and February 2003, due to gynecologic cancer. The patients were classified into two groups; the lymphocele (n=50) and non-lymphocele groups (n=214), as confirmed by ultrasonography, CT scan and MRI. Each group was compared by cancer type and stage, BMI, preoperative Hb, use of pre/postoperative chemotherapy or radiotherapy, number of resected pelvic lymph nodes and the volume of postoperative drainage from a Hemovac® pelvic drain.
Results
Of the 264 patients tested, 15 of 105 cervical cancer (14%), 22 of 115 ovarian cancer (19%) and 11 of 40 endometrial cancer patients (27%), a total of 50 patients (18%), developed lymphoceles. In the lymphocele group (n=50), 13 patients were diagnosed with complicated lymphocele. The BMI and number of resected pelvic lymph nodes were found to be higher in the lymphocele than in the non-lymphocele group (23.94±3.38 vs. 22.52±3.00, p=0.00 and 26.80±14.82 vs. 22.96±10.18, p=0.03, respectively), and showed statistical significance. The occurrence of lymphoceles was lower without postoperative radiotherapy (p=0.01).
Conclusion
Among the 264 patients, a total of 50 patients (18%) developed lymphoceles. The BMI and number of resected lymph nodes were higher in the lymphocele group, and the use of postoperative radiotherapy was associated with a higher risk of lymphoceles. Thirteen of the 50 patients that developed lymphoceles (n=50) required treatment for lymphocele-related complications.
Key words: Lymphocele, Pelvic lymphadenectomy, Risk factors

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic lymphadenectomy is commonly used to assess lymph node status, evaluate the stage and for treating gynecologic malignancies, and is often accompanied by complications, such as hemorrhage or hematoma, postoperative ileus and lymphocele. Of these complications, lymphocele is one of the most common postoperative complications (1).

The definition of a lymphocele is a lymph-filled extraperitoneal space, with no epithelial lining. Most lymphoceles occur within 3~8 weeks, but may occur 1 year after surgery. Previous authors have reported a high incidence of lymphocele after a pelvic lymphadenectomy. Mori, for example, reported an average incidence of 48.5% (1). However, more recent series have reported much lower incidences. Ilancheran et al. noted an incidence of 25.3% in clinically diagnosable lymphocele with cervical cancer (2), Conte et al. noted an incidence of 22% in cervical cancer (3), Logmans et al. an incidence of 20~32% in gynecologic cancer (4) and Panici et al. an incidence of 10~25% in gynecologic cancer (5). The reported incidences of lymphoceles following pelvic lymphadenectomy vary, which is probably related to the method of identification used. Whereas, clinical examination alone may be insufficient to detect a small lymphocele, but prospective scans of the pelvis by ultrasound, CT (computed tomography) scan or MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) offer more objective methods.

Several factors may contribute to this varied incidence. Lymphocele developmental factors are thought to include; the extent of lymphadenectomy, the number of lymph nodes removed, no ligation of lymph vessels, pre/postoperative radiation therapy and the presence of metastases to the lymph nodes (6). Other factors that may influence its development include; the use of retroperitoneal suction drainage (7) and low-dose heparin thromboembolic prophylaxis (8).

Although many lymphoceles are incidental findings having little clinical significance, some can cause problems. Whereas, small lymphoceles are often asymptomatic, infected or large collections may cause fever, abdominal pain, tenesmus, urinary frequency, hydronephrosis, leg edema and/or deep venous thrombosis (9~12). The symptomatology varies depending on the location of the lymphoceles and the effects of pressure on the surrounding structures.

The treatment of small, uninfected lymphoceles is generally conservative; on the other hand, large collections are not as likely to be resorbed spontaneously; thus, require more aggressive approaches, including fine-needle aspiration, sclerotherapy, catheter drainage and/or surgical marsupialization (13).

In these studies, our objective was to evaluate the incidence of lymphocele to identify the risk factors of lymphocele development after a pelvic lymphadenectomy and to investigate their management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was carried out on 264 gynecologic cancer patients who received pelvic lymphadenectomy and paraaortic lymphadenectomy, at the Severance Hospital, Yonsei University of Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, between March 1999 and February 2003. 105 patients had cervical cancer, 115 ovarian cancer, 40 endometrial cancer and 4 had other malignancies. Patients were classified into two groups; the lymphocele (n=50) and the non-lymphocele groups (n=214), as confirmed by ultrasonography, CT scan and MRI. These groups were compared with respect to possible risk factors, i.e., type and stage of cancer, BMI (body mass index), preoperative Hb, the use of pre/postoperative chemotherapy or radiotherapy, the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes and the volume of postoperative drainage from a Hemovac® pelvic drain. The case records of the 50 patients with lymphocele were scrutinized for possible contributory factors, complications and management during postoperative follow-up examinations every 3~4 weeks.

1) Surgical techniques

Almost all primary surgeries were carried out by one surgeon. These involved unilateral or bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomies. For these patients, the lymphadenectomy was associated with hysterectomies, salpingooophorectomies, omentectomies and multiple peritoneal biopsies, with or without bowel resection, depending on the tumor intraabdominal spread. The surgical technique has been previously described by Benedetti-Panici et al, as follows (14). Nodes were dissected from vessels of the adventitia by blunt and sharp dissection. Vessel mobilization was performed with small waves and rubber tape in order to remove all the lymphofatty tissue surrounding the aorta, cava and pelvic vessels. Careful hemostasis was performed. No special effort was made to tie off all lymphatic channels, although surgiclips were used liberally during the procedure. The para-aortic lymphadenectomy included the removal of the lymphofatty tissue around and between the aorta and the cava, was performed. The pelvic lymphadenectomy included removal of the common iliac, external iliac and obturator node groups. For the purposes of this study, the surgical technique was modified as follows: the pelvic peritoneum and the peritoneum along the paracolic gutters were sutured with continuous 2-0 catgut (Chromic, Ethicon Ltd.), after reapproximation of the peritoneum. The fascia was closed with a running 0 polydioxanone (PDS II, Ethicon Ltd.) or 2-0 polyglactin 910 suture (Vicryl; Ethicon Ltd., Somerville, NJ) in all patients. Patients with a sutured peritoneum were drained with a Hemovac® drain (Sewoon-medical), with or without low-pressure suction apparatus. The volume of fluid from each drain was measured daily. The drains were removed when the fluid drainage was <50 ml/day. No patient was discharged with a drain in place. A pathological examination was performed on lymphatic tissue and lymph nodes were counted and submitted for histological analysis to determine metastatic involvement. All patients received intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, which was continuing postoperatively until complete ambulation had been restored. Postoperative follow-up included assessments of febrile morbidity, the duration and amount of fluid drainage, and complications. The clinical detection of lymphoceles was documented at subsequent review visits. Follow-up scans were not performed routinely.

2) Statistics

Differences between the two groups were determined using the t-, the chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Statistical significance was accepted at p<0.05.

RESULTS

Ultrasonography revealed a thin-walled pelvic "cyst" in 50 of the 264 patients (18%) (Fig. 1A). Lymphoceles were visualized as well-circumscribed oval structures, and sometimes contained multiple septa. Cystic structures arising from the pelvic wall, separate from the ovaries (when preserved), were assumed to be lymphoceles. CT findings of a smooth and thin-walled cavity filled with a water-equivalent fluid, which was sharply demarcated from its surroundings, and showing no signs of infiltration, were interpreted as lymphoceles (Fig. 1B). In MRI, because of their protein contents, the lymphoceles had high signal intensities on T2-W1. The configuration and position of lymphoceles, together with their signal characteristics, facilitated their recognition by imaging studies, particularly with a previous history of lymph node dissection (Fig. 1C). By physical examination, clinical lymphoceles were detectable in 11 of the 50 patients. By CT scan and MRI, lymphoceles were visualized in 41 and 6 of the 50 patients, respectively. The time taken for detection of lymphoceles varied from 3 weeks to 6 months postoperatively, with a mean of 1.8 months. In 38 cases, the occurrence was unilateral (Right=15, Left=23), while in the other 12 cases this was bilateral.

The incidences of lymphocele, according to primary cancer type, were as follows (Table 1); Pelvic lymphoceles were diagnosed in 18% (50 of 264) of the total study population, in 14% (15 of 105) of cervical cancer patients, 19% (22 of 115) of ovarian cancer patients and in 27% (11 of 40) of endometrial cancer patients.

Each group was compared with respect to possible risk factors of lymphocele development (Table 2). BMI was found to be significantly higher in the lymphocele (23.94±3.38 vs. 22.52±3.00, p=0.00) than the non-lymphocele group and the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes was significantly higher in the lymphocele group (26.80±14.82 vs. 22.96±10.18, p=0.03). Of the 264 cases, only 32 patients were found to have positive nodes at surgery, 12 in the lymphocele and 20 in the non-lymphocele group (p=0.04). The incidence of patients with lymph node metastases was 12% (32 of 264). No significant differences were found with respect to age, preoperative Hb, duration until lymphocele occurrence or amount of postoperative pelvic drainage. Patients with drains had a median fluid loss of 140.2±80.8 ml/day in the lymphocele and 148.7±91.8 ml/day in the non-lymphocele group, with median drainage durations of 6.3 and 7.1 days, respectively.

84 patients received postoperative radiotherapy, but no patient received preoperative radiotherapy, whereas 46 received preoperative chemotherapy and 190 postoperative chemotherapy and the occurrence of lymphocele was lower for those without postoperative radiotherapy (p=0.01) (Table 3). No significant differences were observed with respect to pre/postoperative chemotherapies (p=0.10) (Table 4).

In our series, 13 of the 50 patients that developed lymphocele needed treatment for lymphocele related complications (Table 5). In the lymphocele group (n=50), eleven of the 13 complained of pelvic pain or leg swelling, and all 13 suffered from mild fever. Some patients had more than one symptom; 2 developed a large (>6 cm) lymphocele, 2 an infected lymphocele, 1 a large infected lymphocele, 6 an infected lymphocele, with hydronephrosis, and a further 2 an infected lymphocele, with hydronephrosis and deep vein thrombosis. Of the 50 lymphocele patients, 11 (22%) had a lymphocele <3 cm in diameter, 26 (52%) 3~6 cm and 13 (26%) were >6 cm in diameter. All lymphoceles with a diameter of <6 cm were asymptomatic, whereas all but 13 lymphoceles with a diameter exceeding 6 cm were symptomatic.

The remaining 37 patients were not treated. Regression of the lymphoceles occurred over several months in 25 of the 37 patients, but persistent lymphoceles were noted in the other 12.

Of the 13 complicated lymphocele patients, none required a laparotomy and marsupialization (Table 6), but all received antibiotic therapy. Two patients were adequately treated by antibiotics alone. Only one patient underwent fine-needle aspiration without image-guidance. Catheter drainage under sonographic guidance was performed in ten patients (Fig. 2). One patient with a single large (>6 cm) lymphocele and another with a large infected lymphocele required catheter drainage. Of the 6 patients with a large infected lymphocele, with hydronephrosis, catheter drainage, with sclerotherapy and ureter stent indwelling, was performed in 2 cases, catheter drainage with sclerotherapy in 1, catheter drainage with ureter stent indwelling in 2 and catheter drainage alone in a further case. Of the two patients with a large infected lymphocele, with hydronephrosis and deep vein thrombosis, one received catheter drainage with sclerotherapy and ureter stent indwelling and in the other, additional anticoagulant therapy was needed. No patient experienced sepsis, bowel perforation or neurovascular injury. Catheter drainage allowed complete clinical and radiological remission in all cases (Fig. 3A,B), which was tolerated and caused no side effects at either the short- or long-term follow-ups.

DISCUSSION

A lymphocele is a retroperitoneal collection of lymphatic fluid contained within a sac, which commonly arise secondary to lymphatic channel injury (1,2,15). A lymphocele occurs after renal transplantation and surgery due to prostatic, gynecologic malignancies, a vascular disease (15,16) or lymphatic vessel injury after a pelvic lymphadenectomy. In the present study, all lymphoceles were located in the pelvis, thus confirming that the rarity of aortic lymphoceles (17,18). Moreover, the incidence of lymphoceles was found to be similar for pelvic lymphadenectomies, with or without a para-aortic lymphadenectomy. These findings suggest that lymphoceles are a specific complication of pelvic lymphadenectomies (2,9). Following the removal of lymph nodes and adipose tissue, a space or potential space is formed, which is bounded by the denuded musculature, both laterally and posteriorly, and by the peritoneum medially (9). Although this space is spontaneously obliterated in the majority of patients, lymph accumulation occurs in others. The resulting mass varies in size, and may apply variable pressures on the ureter, bladder, rectosigmoid and blood vessels. In the majority of patients these effects may be minimal (i.e., asymptomatic), and are rarely severe enough to interfere with organ function.

Lymphoceles have occurred in approximately 10 to 25% of previous studies, and in most are asymptomatic and disappear spontaneously (2,5,19). However, in 5 to 10% of patients, the lymphoceles become symptomatic, manifesting fever, pain, constipation, prolonged ileus, urinary frequency, obstructive uropathy, leg edema, erythema of overlying skin or deep vein thrombosis (11,20). In our series, the incidence rate of symptomatic lymphocele was 18% (Table 1), which was comparable with the rates reported by Conte et al. (3) and Petru et al. (17), although is rather high compared with figures published more recently (14,21). However, our series included both symptomatic and progressive asymptomatic cases, which undoubtedly influenced the observed incidence of lymphoceles.

Lymphoceles can be detected by clinical examination, ultrasonography, intravenous urography, CT scan or MRI. The differential diagnosis includes; urinoma, seroma, hematoma, abscess and a cystic neoplasm. Lymphoceles typically become detectable within 3~8 weeks postoperatively (3,20). Those that occur later than 1 year after surgery should be suspected of harboring a recurrent disease, although in our experience lymphocele development has not occurred more than 1 year after surgery. Most of the lymphoceles in the present series regressed spontaneously; 37 of the 50 patients that underwent a CT scan showed resolution or a decreased size.

The formation of lymphoceles may be promoted by several factors: the extent of lymphadenectomy (9,10,12), the number of lymph nodes removed (22,23); no ligation of lymph vessels (24); the presence of metastases to the lymph nodes (9); pre/postoperative radiation therapy (8,11) and the prophylactic use of anticoagulants (11). However, none of these potential factors have been proven to be significant. In our series, the lymphocele and non-lymphocele groups were significantly different in terms of the number of resected lymph nodes, BMI and the use of postoperative radiotherapy (Table 2, 3). Efforts to prevent lymphocele formation have only been partially successful. Such methods include; strict indications and well-defined dissection boundaries, retroperitoneal suction drainage (7,16), and the prophylactic use of antibiotics (11).

The treatment of lymphocele should be individualized. If they are asymptomatic, they should be monitored for spontaneous regression. In the majority of cases this will lead to successful resolution, as in the present series. However, regression may be a slow process; occurring over several months. The management of lymphoceles has involved several strategies, including percutaneous needle aspiration, percutaneous catheter drainage, sclerotherapy and open drainage by laparotomy, as well as laparoscopy. Asymptomatic lymphoceles <100 ml can be followed clinically, and will usually resolve spontaneously. Lymphoceles that persist for >6 months or become symptomatic can be reduced by ultrasonography or CT scan-guided percutaneous needle aspiration. The decision to puncture a lymphocele depends mainly on its location. Aspirated fluids should be sent for chemistry, cytology and culture, in order to establish a diagnosis and rule out malignancy or infection. Large or recurrent lymphoceles may be managed by sonography or CT scan-guided placement of a percutaneous catheter, with drainage. The catheter is left within the lymphocele until drainage has diminished to 50 ml per 24h and lymphocele resolution has been demonstrated radiographically. The morbidity associated with this procedure is lower than those of invasive surgical procedures, with the successful resolution of lymphoceles using this method having been reported in between 79 and 82% of cases (19). Ultrasonography or CT scan-guided percutaneous aspiration, followed with sclerotherapy, is another treatment modality. Some studies have described lymphocele treatment by percutaneous catheter drainage and sclerotherapy with 95% absolute ethanol, 105 povidone iodine solution, tetracycline, sodium tetradecyl sulfate, or doxycycline. Lymphoceles rarely require a laparotomy and intraperitoneal marsupialization. For infected lymphoceles, antibiotics alone are often sufficient. However, the identities of the common pathogens that cause a lymphocele infection, and the route of the infection, remain unclear. However, infections are largely of theoretical concern, as they may occur in the early postoperative period during the re-epithelization process and related to the accumulation of fluids (25). In our series, 13 of the 50 patients with lymphoceles needed treatment due to lymphocele related complications (Table 5, 6); the remaining 37 were not treated. No patient required a laparotomy and marsupialization. All 13 treated patients were administered antibiotics. Two patients responded adequately to antibiotic treatment alone. Only one patient underwent fine-needle aspiration without image-guidance. Catheter drainage under sonographic guidance was performed in ten patients. No patient experienced sepsis, bowel perforation or neurovascular injury.

Serial radiological examinations in the patients that underwent pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomies allowed for the early detection and treatment of symptomatic and progressive asymptomatic collections, which possibly reduced the duration of therapy and the risk of further complications. However, most lymphocele patients are asymptomatic, and rarely needed treatment. Therefore, it is our belief that close clinical examinations are required in patients having undergone a pelvic lymphadenectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, of the 264 patients, 50 (18%) developed lymphoceles, and it was indicated that the number of resected lymph nodes, the BMI and use of postoperative radiotherapy should be viewed as risk factors for lymphocele development. In the lymphocele group (n=50), 13 patients needed treatment due to lymphocele-associated complications.

REFERENCES

1. Mori N. Clinical and experimental studies on the so-called lymphocyst which develops after radical hysterectomy in cancer of the uterine cervix. J Jpn Obstet Gynecol Soc. 1955;2:178–203. PMID: 13286539PubMed
2. Ilancheran A, Monaghan JM. Pelvic lymphocyst--a 10-year experience. Gynecol Oncol. 1988;29:333–336. PMID: 3345953Article PubMed
3. Conte M, Panici PB, Guariglia L, Scambia G, Greggi S, Mancuso S. Pelvic lymphocele following radical para-aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: incidence rate and percutaneous management. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:268–271. PMID: 2196500PubMed
4. Logmans A, Kruyt RH, de Bruin HG, Cox PH, Pillay M, Trimbos JB. Lymphedema and lymphocysts following lymphadenectomy may be prevented by omentoplasty: A pilot study. Gynecol Oncol. 1999;75:323–327. PMID: 10600283Article PubMed
5. Benedetti-Panici P, Maneschi F, Cutillo G. Pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomy. Surg Clin North Am. 2001;81:841–858. PMID: 11551129Article PubMed
6. Shingleton HM, Orr HW. Cancer of the cervix: Diagnosis and Treatment in Current reviews in obstetrics and gynecology. 1993. Vol. 5. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
7. Symmonds RE, Pratt JH. Prevention of fistulas and lymphocysts in radical hysterectomy. Preliminary report of a new technic. Obstet Gynecol. 1961;17:57–64. PMID: 13774382PubMed
8. Catalona WJ, Kadmon D, Crane DB. Effect of mini-dose heparin on lymphocele formation following extraperitoneal pelvic lymphadenectomy. J Urol. 1980;123:890–892. PMID: 7382008Article PubMed
9. Rutledge F, Dodd GD Jr, Kasilag FB Jr. Lymphocysts; a complication of radical pelvic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;77:1165–1175. PMID: 13649788Article PubMed
10. Pennehouat G, Mosseri V, Durand JC, Hamelin JP, Asselain B, Pilleron JP, et al. Lymphoceles and peritonization following lymphadenectomy for cancer of the uterus. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1988;17:373–378. PMID: 3294282PubMed
11. Clarke-Pearson DL, Jelovsek FR, Creasman WT. Thromboembolism complicating surgery for cervical and uterine malignancy: incidence, risk factors, and prophylaxis. Obstet Gynecol. 1983;61:87–94. PMID: 6823353PubMed
12. Orr JW Jr, Barter JF, Kilgore LC, Soong SJ, Shingleton HM, Hatch KD. Closed suction pelvic drainage after radical pelvic surgical procedures. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;155:867–871. PMID: 3766643Article PubMed
13. White M, Mueller PR, Ferrucci JT Jr, Butch RJ, Simeone JF, Neff CC, et al. Percutaneous drainage of postoperative abdominal and pelvic lymphoceles. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985;145:1065–1069. PMID: 3901705Article PubMed
14. Benedetti-Panici P, Maneschi F, Scambia G, Mancuso S. A new transabdominal approach to the left retroperitoneum for systematic removal of lymph nodes left of the aorta in gynecologic malignancies. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;83:1060–1064. PMID: 8190424Article PubMed
15. Metcalf KS, Peel KR. Lymphocele. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1993;75:387–392. PMID: 8285540PubMed PMC
16. Blebea J, Choudry R. Thigh isosulfan blue injection in the treatment of postoperative lymphatic complications. J Vasc Surg. 1999;30:350–354. PMID: 10436456Article PubMed
17. Petru E, Tamussino K, Lahousen M, Winter R, Pickel H, Haas J. Pelvic and paraaortic lymphocysts after radical surgery because of cervical and ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;161:937–941. PMID: 2801842Article PubMed
18. Livingston WD, Confer DJ, Smith RB. Large lymphoceles resulting from retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. J Urol. 1980;124:543–546. PMID: 7420600Article PubMed
19. Spiegel RA, Hessel SJ, Katz ER, Levy JM. Pelvic fullness, urgency and frequency following lymphadenectomy. Pelvic lymphocele. West J Med. 1987;147:357–358. PMID: 3673073PubMed PMC
20. Terada KY, Roberts JA. Lymphoceles following second-look laparotomy for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1988;29:382–384. PMID: 3345957Article PubMed
21. Benedet JL, Turko M, Boyes DA, Nickerson KG, Bienkowska BT. Radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;137:254–262. PMID: 7377245Article PubMed
22. Nelson JH Jr, HUston JW. Lymphocyst formation following pelvic lymphadenectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;78:1298–1300. PMID: 14426460Article PubMed
23. de Roo T. The value of lymphography in lymphedema. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1967;124:755–765. PMID: 6019288PubMed
24. Ferguson JH, Maclure JG. Lymphocele following lymphadenectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961;82:783–792. PMID: 13892338Article PubMed
25. Fung YM, Wong WS. Malignant lymphocyst after Wertheim's operation. Gynecol Oncol. 1992;44:288–290. PMID: 1541444Article PubMed

Fig. 1

Radiological examination showing lymphocele. (A) Ultrasonography revealed a thin-walled pelvic "cyst" (about 7×3 cm² sized). Lymphoceles were visualized as well-circumscribed oval structures. (B) CT findings of a smooth and thin-walled cavity (arrow) filled with a water-equivalent fluid, which was sharply demarcated from its surroundings, and showing no signs of infiltration were interpreted as lymphoceles. After ultrasonography-guided percutaneous catheter drainage, a catheter (arrow head) was inserted in the lymphocele cavity. (C) MRI revealed an about 7×3 cm² sized cyst, with low signal intensity on T1-W1.

Fig. 2

Fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous catheter drainage (after pelvic sonography). Arrow head; catheter

Fig. 3

Percutaneous catheter drainage. (A) Large (about 11×7 cm² sized) lymphocele were managed using sonography-guided placement of a percutaneous catheter, with drainage. The catheter (arrow head) is at the left, within the lymphocele. (B) Catheter drainage allowed complete radiological remission in this case. Arrow head; catheter.

Table 1

Incidence of lymphocele according to the primary cancer

p=0.1

Table 2

Risk factors of lymphocele development

^*body mass index, ^†number of resected pelvic lymph nodes, ^‡number of resected aortic lymph nodes, ^§total volume of postoperative drainage from pelvic drain, ^∥mean volume of postoperative drainage from a Hemovac® pelvic drain

Table 3

Relationship of postoperative radiotherapy to lymphocele development

p=0.01

Table 4

Relationship of pre-/postoperative chemotherapy to lymphocele development

p=0.1

Table 5

Management of lymphoceles

^*>6 cm, ^†deep vein thrombosis.

Table 6

Management of lymphocele related complications

^*>6 cm, ^†deep vein thrombosis.

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Postoperative Morbidity and Factors Predicting the Development of Lymphoceles Following Lateral Pelvic Node Dissection for Rectal Cancer: A Cohort Study
Joseph Mathew, Mufaddal Kazi, Ashwin Desouza, Avanish Saklani
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2025; 32(1): 165. CrossRef
Advances and Techniques in Medical Imaging and Minimally Invasive Interventions for Disorders of the Central Conducting and Mesenteric Lymphatic System
Frederic J. Bertino, Kin Fen Kevin Fung
Lymphatics.2025; 3(1): 8. CrossRef
Risk factors for lymph ascites after surgery for endometrial cancer and impact on lymphedema of the legs. A prospective longitudinal Swedish multicenter study
Madelene Wedin, Karin Glimskär Stålberg, Ulrika Ottander, Åsa Åkesson, Gabriel Lindahl, Ninnie Borendal Wodlin, Preben Kjølhede
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica.2025; 104(5): 976. CrossRef
Postoperative lymphatic leakage following laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: the first case report and review of the literature
N. Kapellas, S. Alkhalil, T. Hero, M. Senkal
Hernia.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Intra‐lymphocele microsurgical identification of causative afferent vessels for effective lymphaticovenular anastomosis in lymphocele treatment: A case report
Kohei Mitsui, Mitsunaga Narushima, Kanako Danno, Ryohei Ishiura, Chihena H. Banda
Microsurgery.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Symptomatic Lymphocele After Robot-Assisted Pelvic Lymphadenectomy as Part of the Primary Surgical Treatment for Cervical and Endometrial Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Alise de Jong, Ilse G.T. Baeten, Anna Jansen, Jacob P. Hoogendam, Ina M. Jürgenliemk–Schulz, Ronald P. Zweemer, Cornelis G. Gerestein
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology.2024; 31(3): 243. CrossRef
Vascular Clips for Preventing Lymphocele and Symptomatic Lymphocele in Patients With Gynecologic Malignancies After Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymphadenectomy
Luyang Zhao, Xiufeng Xie, Wensheng Fan, Yang Wen, Nina Zhang, Jia Xu, Yuanguang Meng, Chenglei Gu
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology.2024; 31(10): 875. CrossRef
Compression Neuropathy Caused by Pelvic Lymphocele after Laparoscopic Surgical Staging
Dong Jin Chae, Jong Bum Park, Mi Jin Hong, Jungyun Kim, Cho E. Sim, Seung-Eun Kim, Yung Jin Lee
Journal of Electrodiagnosis and Neuromuscular Diseases.2024; 26(2): 29. CrossRef
Long-term outcomes of sentinel lymph node navigation surgery for early-stage cervical cancer
Shinichi Togami, Nozomi Furuzono, Mika Mizuno, Shintaro Yanazume, Hiroaki Kobayashi
International Journal of Clinical Oncology.2024; 29(11): 1740. CrossRef
Lymphatic embolization for early post-operative lymphatic leakage after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer
Yoo Sub Shin, Kichang Han, Jongsoo Lee, Hyun Ho Han, Won Sik Jang, Gyoung Min Kim, Ji Eun Heo, Mazyar Zahir
PLOS ONE.2024; 19(9): e0305240. CrossRef
Incomplete lymphatic sealing around the inferior mesenteric artery is a risk factor for chylous ascites in robotic rectal cancer surgery
Hajime Ushigome, Hiroki Takahashi, Anri Maeda, Akira Kato, Shinnosuke Harata, Kawori Watanabe, Takeshi Yanagita, Takuya Suzuki, Kazuyoshi Shiga, Koshiro Harata, Ryo Ogawa, Yoichi Matsuo, Akira Mitsui, Masahiro Kimura, Shuji Takiguchi
Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2023; 16(2): 163. CrossRef
A Prospective Observational Study to Know the Origin of Lymphorrhea in Post-Renal Transplant Patients using Creatine Phosphokinase and Lactate Dehydrogenase
Eeshansh Khare, Debansu Sarkar, Debojyoti Bhattacharjee, Dilip Kumar Pal
Indian Journal of Transplantation.2023; 17(2): 215. CrossRef
Lymphatic Complications Following Sentinel Node Biopsy or Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Endometrial Cancer
Shinichi Terada, Tomohito Tanaka, Hikaru Murakami, Hiromitsu Tsuchihashi, Akihiko Toji, Atsushi Daimon, Shunsuke Miyamoto, Ruri Nishie, Shoko Ueda, Sousuke Hashida, Natsuko Morita, Hiroshi Maruoka, Hiromi Konishi, Yuhei Kogata, Kohei Taniguchi, Kazumasa K
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2023; 12(13): 4540. CrossRef
The incidence of perioperative lymphatic complications after radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between robotic and laparoscopic approach : a systemic review and meta-analysis
Jong Ha Hwang, Bo Wook Kim
International Journal of Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Vacuum-Assisted Suction Drainage as a Successful Treatment Option for Postoperative Symptomatic Lymphoceles
Mareike Franke, Christian Saager, Jan-Robert Kröger, Jan Borggrefe, Kersten Mückner
RöFo - Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden Verfahren.2022; 194(04): 384. CrossRef
The incidence of postoperative symptomatic lymphocele after pelvic lymphadenectomy between abdominal and laparoscopic approach: a systemic review and meta-analysis
Jong Ha Hwang, Bo Wook Kim
Surgical Endoscopy.2022; 36(10): 7114. CrossRef
Lymphatic Interventions in the Cancer Patient
Eslam Wassal Youssef, Ahmed Aly, Akshaar Brahmbhatt, Amgad Moussa, Ernesto Santos
Current Oncology Reports.2022; 24(10): 1351. CrossRef
Difficult-to-treat Retroperitoneal Lymphocele Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion―A Case Report―
Motonori Ishii, Masahito Hara, Yu Yamamoto, Mamoru Matsuo, Hiroshi Ito, Daimon Shiraishi, Masataka Ando, Masakazu Takayasu
Spinal Surgery.2022; 36(1): 66. CrossRef
Impact of Sentinel Node Mapping in Decreasing the Risk of Lymphocele in Endometrial Cancer
Thiago Pereira Diniz, Eric Drizlionoks, Carlos Chaves Faloppa, Jacqueline Nunes Menezes, Henrique Mantoan, Bruna Tirapelli Gonçalves, Paulo Henrique Domingues Miranda Brandao, Lillian Yuri Kumagai, Levon Badiglian-Filho, Alexandre Andre Balieiro Anastacio
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2021; 28(6): 3293. CrossRef
Fistula formation between infected pelvic lymphocele and sigmoid colon: A rare complication of pelvic lymphadenectomy
Soukaina Allioui, Sanae Sninate, Hounayda Jerguigue, Rachida Latib, Youssef Omor
Radiology Case Reports.2021; 16(3): 707. CrossRef
Managing infected seroma post-lymphadenectomy; A retrospective cohort study and cost analysis in melanoma patients
A.V. Robinson, F. Ali, D.J. Dewar, A.H.S. Peach
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery.2021; 74(9): 2251. CrossRef
Recommendations and Clinical Validation of Inguinal Clinical Target Volume Delineation in Penile Cancer
Rishi Mittal, Rahul Krishnatry, Priyamvada Maitre, Vedang Murthy
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics.2021; 111(3): 741. CrossRef
Comparison of lymphatic complications between sentinel node navigation surgery and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with cervical cancer
Shinichi Togami, Rintaro Kubo, Toshihiko Kawamura, Shintaro Yanazume, Masaki Kamio, Hiroaki Kobayashi
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology.2020; 50(5): 543. CrossRef
Treatment of lymphocele with negative pressure wound therapy post inguinal mass excision: A case-report
Caio Cesar Martins Focássio, Ricardo Augusto Bravo Gamboa, Luis Felipe Staut de Marco, Daniela Mina Fukasawa, Talita da Silva Parente, Vitor Leoni Boher Lopes Dornas
International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2020; 66: 43. CrossRef
Incidence of and risk factors for lymphocele formation after lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: a retrospective study
K. Ochiai, M. Kaneko, H. Nozawa, K. Kawai, K. Hata, T. Tanaka, T. Nishikawa, Y. Shuno, K. Sasaki, M. Hiyoshi, S. Emoto, K. Murono, H. Sonoda, S. Ishihara
Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(2): 161. CrossRef
Early Postoperative Complications and Outcomes of Kidney Transplantation in Moderately Obese Patients
Karola Warzyszyńska, Michał Zawistowski, Edyta Karpeta, Agata Ostaszewska, Maurycy Jonas, Maciej Kosieradzki
Transplantation Proceedings.2020; 52(8): 2318. CrossRef
Predictive Factors of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Gynecologic Cancer Survivors with Lower Extremity Edema: A Single-Center and Retrospective Study
Jungin Kim, Hyun-Jun Kim, Seunghun Park, Dong Kyu Kim, Tae Hee Kim
Healthcare.2020; 8(1): 48. CrossRef
Risk factors for lymphatic complications following lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrial cancer
Shinichi Togami, Rintaro Kubo, Toshihiko Kawamura, Shintaro Yanazume, Masaki Kamio, Hiroaki Kobayashi
Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.2020; 59(3): 420. CrossRef
Comparison of postoperative benign pelvic cysts occurred after gynecologic or gyne-oncologic surgery treated with percutaneous transcatheteric sclerosant alcohol therapy
Cihan Comba, AysunErbahceci Salik, Gokhan Demirayak, SakirVolkan Erdogan, Filiz Sacan, IsaAykut Ozdemir
Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy.2020; 9(4): 198. CrossRef
Distribution of lymphocele following lymphadenectomy in patients with gynecological malignancies
Soo Youn Song, Mia Park, Byung Hun Kang, Jung Bo Yang, Young Bok Ko, Mina Lee, Ki Hwan Lee, Heon Jong Yoo
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science.2020; 63(6): 700. CrossRef
Combined treatment with lymphaticovenular anastomosis and ethanol sclerotherapy for femoral lymphocele with lymphedema after oncologic surgery
Shuhei Yoshida, Isao Koshima, Hirofumi Imai, Ayano Sasaki, Shogo Nagamatsu, Kazunori Yokota
Medicine: Case Reports and Study Protocols.2020; 1(1): e0007. CrossRef
Decreasing Lymphoid Fluid Accumulation During Lymph-Node Dissection
Tanitra Tantitamit, Kuan-Gen Huang, Lih-Lian Hwang
Journal of Gynecologic Surgery.2019; 35(3): 129. CrossRef
Lymphatic cysts after gynecological cancer surgery: risk factors, diagnosis and treatment
Т. Т. Rogovskaya, I. V. Berlev
Tumors of female reproductive system.2019; 14(4): 72. CrossRef
Predictors of Lymphoceles in Women Who Underwent Laparotomic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Early Gynecologic Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Hui-Hua Chen, Wan-Hua Ting, Ho-Hsiung Lin, Sheng-Mou Hsiao
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2019; 16(6): 936. CrossRef
Ultrasound characteristics of a symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphocele after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy
Vit Weinberger, Daniela Fischerova, Ivana Semeradova, Jiri Slama, David Cibula, Michal Zikan
Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.2019; 58(2): 266. CrossRef
Bilateral hydronephrosis subsequent to a giant lymphocele after robotic radical prostatectomy
Erdem Koç, Bahri Gök, Davut Kamacı, Erem Asil, Ali Fuat Atmaca
Journal of Surgery and Medicine.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Manejo postoperatorio de cistectomía radical. Revisión de la evidencia sobre la prevención y el tratamiento de las complicaciones urológicas
O. Rodríguez Faba, R. Parada Moreno, L. Malca, A. Palomino Martínez, N. Nervo, A. Breda, C. Esquinas, J. Palou
Actas Urológicas Españolas.2018; 42(3): 143. CrossRef
Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer—Feasibility, safety and lymphatic complications
Barbara Geppert, Céline Lönnerfors, Michele Bollino, Jan Persson
Gynecologic Oncology.2018; 148(3): 491. CrossRef
Embolization Using N-butyl Cyanoacrylate for Postoperative Lymphatic Leakage: A Case Report
Emina Kayama, Koshiro Nishimoto, Gou Kaneko, Suguru Shirotake, Taiki Hayashi, Hideyuki Kondo, Takashi Okabe, Ken Nakazawa, Masafumi Oyama
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer.2018; 16(2): e355. CrossRef
Postoperative management of radical cystectomy. Review of the evidence on the prevention and treatment of urological complications
O. Rodríguez Faba, R. Parada Moreno, L. Malca, A. Palomino Martínez, N. Nervo, A. Breda, C. Esquinas, J. Palou
Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition).2018; 42(3): 143. CrossRef
Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Exploring the Effect of TachoSil on Lymphocele Formation After Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Prostate Cancer
Sarah Buelens, Charles Van Praet, Filip Poelaert, Andries Van Huele, Karel Decaestecker, Nicolaas Lumen
Urology.2018; 118: 134. CrossRef
Risk factors, microbiology and management of infected lymphocyst after lymphadenectomy for gynecologic malignancies
Xuegong Ma, Yingmei Wang, Aiping Fan, Mengting Dong, Xin Zhao, Xuhong Zhang, Fengxia Xue
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.2018; 298(6): 1195. CrossRef
The role of pelvic lymphocele in the development of early postoperative complications
Octavian Constantin Neagoe, Mihaela Ionica, Octavian Mazilu
Medicine.2018; 97(37): e12353. CrossRef
Risk factors for lymphatic complications following lymphadenectomy in patients with cervical cancer
Shinichi Togami, Toshihiko Kawamura, Mika Fukuda, Shintaro Yanazume, Masaki Kamio, Hiroaki Kobayashi
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology.2018; 48(12): 1036. CrossRef
Microbiological evaluation of infected pelvic lymphocele after robotic prostatectomy: potential predictors for culture positivity and selection of the best empirical antimicrobial therapy
Alaa Hamada, Catalina Hwang, Jorge Fleisher, Ingolf Tuerk
International Urology and Nephrology.2017; 49(7): 1183. CrossRef
Nomogram predicting risk of lymphocele in gynecologic cancer patients undergoing pelvic lymph node dissection
Baraem Yoo, Hyojeong Ahn, Miseon Kim, Dong Hoon Suh, Kidong Kim, Jae Hong No, Yong Beom Kim
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science.2017; 60(5): 440. CrossRef
A successful case of a para-aortic lymphocele treated with autologous peripheral blood injection
Keiji Nishibeppu, Tomohiro Arita, Masayoshi Nakanishi, Yoshiaki Kuriu, Yasutoshi Murayama, Katsutoshi Shoda, Toshiyuki Kosuga, Hirotaka Konishi, Ryo Morimura, Shuhei Komatsu, Atsushi Shiozaki, Hisashi Ikoma, Daisuke Ichikawa, Hitoshi Fujiwara, Kazuma Okam
Radiology Case Reports.2017; 12(4): 760. CrossRef
Retroperitoneal Lymphocele in a Patient with Primary Ovarian Cancer: A Case Report
Leila Mousavi Seresht, Meysam Izadi, Zohreh Yousefi, Amir Hosein Jafarian, Nooshin Babapour, Laya Shirinzadeh, Zahra Rastin
Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Cancer Research.2017; 2(4): 1. CrossRef
A review of the postoperative lymphatic leakage
Shulan Lv, Qing Wang, Wanqiu Zhao, Lu Han, Qi Wang, Nasra Batchu, Qurat Ulain, Junkai Zou, Chao Sun, Jiang Du, Qing Song, Qiling Li
Oncotarget.2017; 8(40): 69062. CrossRef
Symptomatic Lymphocele Formation After Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer
Nasuh Utku Dogan, Nigar Garagozova, Tatiana Pfiffer, Anna Beier, Christhardt Köhler, Giovanni Favero
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology.2016; 23(3): 442. CrossRef
Risk factor analysis for massive lymphatic ascites after laparoscopic retroperitonal lymphadenectomy in gynecologic cancers and treatment using intranodal lymphangiography with glue embolization
Tae-Wook Kong, Suk-Joon Chang, Jinoo Kim, Jiheum Paek, Su Hyun Kim, Je Hwan Won, Hee-Sug Ryu
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology.2016;[Epub] CrossRef
Use of TachoSil® to Prevent Symptomatic Lymphocele after an Aggressive Tumor Debulking with Lymphadenectomy for Advanced Stage Ovarian Cancer. A Pilot Study
Lucas Minig, Maria Guadalupe Patrono, Jose Miguel Cárdenas-Rebollo, Pedro Martin Marfil, Virginia Rodriguez-Tabares, Linus Chuang
Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation.2016; 81(6): 497. CrossRef
Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer Patients With Pelvic Lymphocele After Surgery: Clinical and Dosimetric Data of 30 Patients
Barbara Alicja Jereczek-Fossa, Sarah Pia Colangione, Cristiana Fodor, Stefania Russo, Raffaella Cambria, Dario Zerini, Maria Bonora, Agnese Cecconi, Barbara Vischioni, Andrea Vavassori, Deliu Victor Matei, Danilo Bottero, Antonio Brescia, Gennaro Musi, Fe
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer.2015; 13(4): e223. CrossRef
Optimal Timing for Drainage of Infected LymphocystsAfter Lymphadenectomy for Gynecologic Cancer
Kosuke Hiramatsu, Eiji Kobayashi, Yutaka Ueda, Tomomi Egawa-Takata, Shinya Matsuzaki, Toshihiro Kimura, Kenjiro Sawada, Kiyoshi Yoshino, Masami Fujita, Tadashi Kimura
International Journal of Gynecological Cancer.2015; 25(2): 337. CrossRef
A prospective study examining the incidence of asymptomatic and symptomatic lymphoceles following lymphadenectomy in patients with gynecological cancer
Michal Zikan, Daniela Fischerova, Ivana Pinkavova, Jiri Slama, Vit Weinberger, Ladislav Dusek, David Cibula
Gynecologic Oncology.2015; 137(2): 291. CrossRef
Prevention of Lymphoceles Using FloSeal and CoSeal After Laparoscopic Lymphadenectomy in Patients With Gynecologic Malignancies
Christhardt Köhler, Sarah Kyeyamwa, Simone Marnitz, Audrey Tsunoda, Filiberto Vercelino, Achim Schneider, Giovanni Favero
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology.2015; 22(3): 451. CrossRef
Les lymphadénectomies dans le cancer de l’endomètre, bilan après 4ans de pratique, doit-on poursuivre ?
Nicolas Agar, Anne-Cécile Philippe, Nicolas Bourdel, Benoît Rabischong, Michel Canis, Guillaume Le Bouedec, Aurélien Mulliez, Jacques Dauplat, Christophe Pomel
Bulletin du Cancer.2015; 102(5): 428. CrossRef
Impact of lymphoceles on organ at risk doses in patients undergoing adjuvant pelvic radiation for carcinoma cervix
Chandani Hotwani, Supriya Chopra, Nara Moirangthem, Sarthak Mohanty
International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology.2015; 3(2): 3220. CrossRef
Bleomycin Sclerotherapy for Severe Symptomatic and Persistent Pelvic Lymphocele
Ana Sofia Fernandes, Antónia Costa, Raquel Mota, Vera Paiva
Case Reports in Obstetrics and Gynecology.2014; 2014: 1. CrossRef
Lymphocele: prevalence and management in gynecological malignancies
Vit Weinberger, David Cibula, Michal Zikan
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy.2014; 14(3): 307. CrossRef
Early Cervical Carcinoma and Fertility-sparing Treatment Options: MR Imaging as a Tool in Patient Selection and a Follow-up Modality
Patricia Noël, Mireille Dubé, Marie Plante, Guillaume St-Laurent
RadioGraphics.2014; 34(4): 1099. CrossRef
Prevention of lymphocele development in gynecologic cancers by the electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing device
Naotake Tsuda, Kimio Ushijima, Kouichiro Kawano, Shuji Takemoto, Shin Nishio, Gounosuke Sonoda, Toshiharu Kamura
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology.2014; 25(3): 229. CrossRef
Lymphocele after extraperitoneal robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: A propensity score‐matching study
Joo Yong Lee, Richilda Red Diaz, Kang Su Cho, Ho Song Yu, Jae Seung Chung, Won Sik Ham, Young Deuk Choi
International Journal of Urology.2013; 20(12): 1169. CrossRef
Ovarian Cystic Lesions
Susan Ackerman, Abid Irshad, Madelene Lewis, Munazza Anis
Radiologic Clinics of North America.2013; 51(6): 1067. CrossRef
Acute Kidney Injury after a Pelvic Surgery
Mototsugu Tanaka, Junichi Hirahashi, Takamoto Ohse, Toshiro Fujita
Nephrology.2013; 18(1): 73. CrossRef
Effective treatment of pelvic lymphocele by lymphaticovenular anastomosis
Takeshi Todokoro, Dominic Furniss, Katsutoshi Oda, Kei Kawana, Mitsunaga Narushima, Makoto Mihara, Kazuki Kikuchi, Hisako Hara, Tetsu Yano, Isao Koshima
Gynecologic Oncology.2013; 128(2): 209. CrossRef
Complications of lymphadenectomy for gynecologic cancer
A. Achouri, C. Huchon, A.S. Bats, C. Bensaid, C. Nos, F. Lécuru
European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO).2013; 39(1): 81. CrossRef
Idiopathic Lymphocele: A Possible Diagnosis for Infraclavicular Masses
Adenauer Marinho de Oliveira Góes Junior, Salim Abdon Haber Jeha
Case Reports in Surgery.2012; 2012: 1. CrossRef
Risk factors of lymphocele after RAH with pelvic lymph node dissection for women with cervical cancer
Ji Yen Lee, Jaeman Bae, Sun-Joo Lee, Ji Yeon Kim, Soo Nyung Kim
Korean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.2012; 55(12): 907. CrossRef
Body mass index and survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer
Dong Hoon Suh, Hee Seung Kim, Hyun Hoon Chung, Jae Weon Kim, Noh Hyun Park, Yong Sang Song, Soon‐Beom Kang
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research.2012; 38(1): 70. CrossRef
Lymphocele and Ovarian Cancer: Risk Factors and Impact on Survival
Tristan Gauthier, Catherine Uzan, Delphine Lefeuvre, Aminata Kane, Geoffroy Canlorbe, Fredéric Deschamps, Catherine Lhomme, Patricia Pautier, Philippe Morice, Sébastien Gouy
The Oncologist.2012; 17(9): 1198. CrossRef
Prévention des lymphocèles et cancers gynécologiques
T. Gauthier, S. Gouy, C. Uzan, A. Kane, P. Morice
Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité.2011; 39(12): 698. CrossRef
Robot-assisted removal of a lymphocyst causing severe neuralgic pain and adductor atrophy
Giorgio Cazzaniga, Christer Borgfeldt, Nils-Olof Wallengren, Jan Persson
Journal of Robotic Surgery.2011; 5(4): 299. CrossRef
Nonovarian Cystic Lesions of the Pelvis
Penelope L. Moyle, Masako Y. Kataoka, Asako Nakai, Akiko Takahata, Caroline Reinhold, Evis Sala
RadioGraphics.2010; 30(4): 921. CrossRef
Late aortic lymphocele and residual ovary syndrome after gynecological surgery
Maria Pastore, Natalina Manci, Claudia Marchetti, Francesca Esposito, Marialetizia Iuliano, Lucia Manganaro, Pierluigi Benedetti Panici
World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2007;[Epub] CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

An Analysis of the Risk Factors and Management of Lymphocele after Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies

Cancer Res Treat. 2004;36(6):377-383. Published online December 31, 2004

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2004.36.6.377

XML Download

Abstract
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES

An Analysis of the Risk Factors and Management of Lymphocele after Pelvic Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies

Fig. 1 Radiological examination showing lymphocele. (A) Ultrasonography revealed a thin-walled pelvic "cyst" (about 7×3 cm2 sized). Lymphoceles were visualized as well-circumscribed oval structures. (B) CT findings of a smooth and thin-walled cavity (arrow) filled with a water-equivalent fluid, which was sharply demarcated from its surroundings, and showing no signs of infiltration were interpreted as lymphoceles. After ultrasonography-guided percutaneous catheter drainage, a catheter (arrow head) was inserted in the lymphocele cavity. (C) MRI revealed an about 7×3 cm2 sized cyst, with low signal intensity on T1-W1.

Fig. 2 Fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous catheter drainage (after pelvic sonography). Arrow head; catheter

Fig. 3 Percutaneous catheter drainage. (A) Large (about 11×7 cm2 sized) lymphocele were managed using sonography-guided placement of a percutaneous catheter, with drainage. The catheter (arrow head) is at the left, within the lymphocele. (B) Catheter drainage allowed complete radiological remission in this case. Arrow head; catheter.