**10. Conclusion**

112 Cancer of the Uterine Endometrium – Advances and Controversies

technical difficulty of the surgery, requires more operating time and increases the risk of intra-operative and postoperative complications. These problems apply even when a minimally invasive surgical approach is adopted. Therefore, the challenge is to identify a surgical technique that provides accurate staging information about nodal status, while

Sentinel lymph node detection might resolve this dilemma. This technique is based upon the observation that in several types of cancer, tumor cells migrate from the primary tumor to one or a few lymph nodes before metastasizing to other lymph nodes (melanoma, breast, cervix, vulva) (Altgassen et al., 2008; Hauspy et al., 2007a&b). Lymphatic mapping by sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection offers a means of assessing the lymph node status of

In a meta-analysis of various techniques to assess lymph node status in endometrial cancer, Selmanet al. (2008) showed that SLN biopsy was more accurate than MRI and CT scan. In endometrial cancer, several approaches have been attempted: serosal injection during surgery, cervical injection or peri-tumoral injection using hysteroscopic assistance. With cervical injection, detection rates of sentinel lymph nodes in low-risk endometrial cancer reach 85% (Abu-Rustum et al., 2009). A recent study in early invasive cancer suggested that SLN biopsy is a more sensitive procedure to detect pelvic lymph node metastasis compared to the classic PLND due to more extensive sectioning by the pathologist of this LN, its occasionally unusual location (common iliac or para-aortic) and the surgeon's thorough search for this blue or "hot" node (Gortzak-Uzan et al., 2010). Similarly, in early-stage endometrial cancer, SLN mapping appears to be a more sensitive procedure for detecting PLN metastasis compared to the classic PLND for the same reasons: the surgeon's thorough search for this sentinel node and extensive sectioning by the pathologist of the sentinel

A French multicentre study (SENTI-ENDO) prospectively evaluated the ability of cervical dual injection of technetium and patent blue to identify SLN in patients with endometrial cancer (Ballester et al 2011). One hundred thirty-three patients were enrolled at nine centers in France. At least one SLN was detected in 111 of the 125 eligible patients; 17% had pelvic lymph node metastases and 5% had an associated SLN in the para-aortic area. Three patients had false-negative results (two had metastatic nodes in the contralateral pelvic area and one in the para-aortic area), giving an NPV of 97% (95% CI 91 to 99) and sensitivity of 84% (62 to 95). All three of the patients in whom the SLN was negative in the presence of metastatic nodes had Type 2 endometrial cancer. Ultrastaging detected metastases, which were missed by conventional histology in nine of 111 (8%) patients with detected SLNs, representing nine of the 19 patients (47%) with metastases. SLN biopsy upstaged 10% of

patients with low-risk and 15% of those with intermediate-risk endometrial cancer.

This study highlights the danger of omitting lymphadenectomy in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer, as suggested by the ASTEC study, as 11% of patients at low risk for lymph node metastasis (Grade 1, endometrioid cancer with no myometrial invasion), had positive lymph node metastasis. The authors conclude that SLN biopsy with cervical dual labeling could be a trade-off between systematic LND and no dissection at all in patients

The limitations with this study are that the investigators used only cervical injection for the SLN mapping, which is not ideal to identify PaLNs. In a review of SLNs in endometrial cancer, Delpech et al 2008, reported a lower rate of para-aortic SLN detection using cervical

primary tumors with respect to metastases, without having to resort to formal LND.

avoiding unnecessary morbidity.

lymph node (Khoury-Collado et al., 2011).

with low or intermediate risk endometrial cancer.

Patients who have Grade I/II, endometrioid adenocarinoma with minimal myometrial invasion have very low risk of lymph node metastasis and do not benefit from LND. However, only a thoroughly detailed intra-operative frozen section can identify this subgroup. All high-risk patients need a systematic PLND as well as a PaLND up to the renal vessels. Such dissection needs considerable technical skills on the part of surgeons, and has risk for patients; but confers a significant survival advantage. Analysis of numerous nodes, particularly when they are small, is tedious for the pathologist. Therefore, SLN mapping has the potential to identify the subset of low-/intermediate-risk patients who do not need lymph node dissection. Research needs to be directed at finding the most accurate method of identifying the sentinel lymph node/nodes in endometrial cancer. This will allow the judicious use of resources, including time, cost and energy, to recover the appropriate number of lymph nodes in high-risk patients who will benefit from this procedure.

#### **11. References**


surgical staging dilemma? *Gynecologic Oncology*, Vol. 113, No. 2 (May 2009), pp. 163-169, 1095-6859 (Electronic) 0090-8258 (Linking)


Alektiar, KM (2006). When and how should adjuvant radiation be used in early endometrial

Altgassen, C; Hertel, H; Brandstadt, A; Kohler, C; Durst, M & Schneider, A (2008).

Altgassen, C; Pagenstecher, J; Hornung, D; Diedrich, K & Hornemann, A (2007). A new

Ballester, M; Dubernard, G; Lecuru, F; Heitz, D; Mathevet, P; Marret, H; Querleu, D; Golfier,

Benedetti Panici, P; Basile, S; Maneschi, F; Alberto Lissoni, A; Signorelli, M; Scambia, G;

Berney, DM; Wheeler, TM; Grignon, DJ; Epstein, JI; Griffiths, DF; Humphrey, PA; van der

Bijen, CB; Briet, JM; de Bock, GH; Arts, HJ; Bergsma-Kadijk, JA & Mourits, MJ (2009). Total

*BMC Cancer,* Vol. 9 (2009), pp. 23, 1471-2407 (Electronic) 1471-2407 (Linking) Bijen, CB; Vermeulen, KM; Mourits, MJ; Arts, HJ; Ter Brugge, HG; van der Sijde, R; Wijma,

105, No. 2 (May 2007), pp. 457-461, 0090-8258 (Print) 0090-8258 (Linking) Arango, HA; Hoffman, MS; Roberts, WS; DeCesare, SL; Fiorica, JV & Drake, J (2000).

163-169, 1095-6859 (Electronic) 0090-8258 (Linking)

4296 (Print) 1053-4296 (Linking)

(Electronic) 0732-183X (Linking)

553-556, 0029-7844 (Print) 0029-7844 (Linking)

1474-5488 (Electronic) 1470-2045 (Linking)

(Electronic) 0027-8874 (Linking)

(Electronic) 0893-3952 (Linking)

(Electronic) 0090-8258 (Linking)

surgical staging dilemma? *Gynecologic Oncology*, Vol. 113, No. 2 (May 2009), pp.

cancer? *Seminars in Radiation Oncology,* Vol. 16, No. 3 (Jul 2006), pp. 158-163, 1053-

Multicenter validation study of the sentinel lymph node concept in cervical cancer: AGO Study Group. *Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology*, Vol. 26, No. 18 (Jun 20 2008), pp. 2943-2951, 1527-7755

approach to label sentinel nodes in endometrial cancer. *Gynecologic Oncology*, Vol.

Accuracy of lymph node palpation to determine need for lymphadenectomy in gynecologic malignancies. *Obstetrics and Gynecology,* Vol. 95, No. 4 (Apr 2000), pp.

F; Leblanc, E; Rouzier, R & Darai, E (2011). Detection rate and diagnostic accuracy of sentinel-node biopsy in early stage endometrial cancer: a prospective multicentre study (SENTI-ENDO). *The Lancet Oncology*, Vol. 12, No. 5 (May 2011), pp. 469-476,

Angioli, R; Tateo, S; Mangili, G; Katsaros, D; Garozzo, G; Campagnutta, E; Donadello, N; Greggi, S; Melpignano, M; Raspagliesi, F; Ragni, N; Cormio, G; Grassi, R; Franchi, M; Giannarelli, D; Fossati, R; Torri, V; Amoroso, M; Croce, C & Mangioni, C (2008). Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. *Journal of the National Cancer Institute*, Vol. 100, No. 23 (Dec 3, 2008), pp. 1707-1716, 1460-2105

Kwast, T; Montironi, R; Delahunt, B; Egevad, L & Srigley, JR (2011). International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes. *Modern pathology: An Official Journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc*, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Jan 2011), pp. 39-47, 1530-0285

laparoscopic hysterectomy versus abdominal hysterectomy in the treatment of patients with early stage endometrial cancer: a randomized multi center study.

J; Bongers, MY; van der Zee, AG & de Bock, GH (2011). Cost effectiveness of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in early stage endometrial cancer: a randomised trial. *Gynecologic Oncology,* Vol. 121, No. 1 (Apr 2011), pp. 76-82, 1095-6859


Creasman, WT; Odicino, F; Maisonneuve, P; Quinn, MA; Beller, U; Benedet, JL; Heintz, AP;

Creutzberg, CL; van Putten, WL; Koper, PC; Lybeert, ML; Jobsen, JJ; Warlam-Rodenhuis,

Delpech Y, Coutant C, Darai E, Barranger E (2008). Sentinel lymph node evaluation in

Delpech, Y & Barranger, E (2010). Management of lymph nodes in endometrioid uterine

Denschlag, D; Tan, L; Patel, S; Kerim-Dikeni, A; Souhami, L & Gilbert, L (2007). Stage III

Dijkhuizen, FP; Mol, BW; Brolmann, HA & Heintz, AP (2000). The accuracy of endometrial

Dubinsky, TJ (2004). Value of sonography in the diagnosis of abnormal vaginal bleeding.

Dotters, DJ (2000). Preoperative CA 125 in endometrial cancer: is it useful? *American Journal* 

Fleischer, AC (1997). Optimizing the accuracy of transvaginal ultrasonography of the

Frumovitz, M; Slomovitz, BM; Singh, DK; Broaddus, RR; Abrams, J; Sun, CC; Bevers, M &

Gehrig, PA; Cantrell, LA; Shafer, A; Abaid, LN; Mendivil, A & Boggess, JF (2008). What is

(Feb 2009), pp. 10-14, 1473-656X (Electronic) 1040-872X (Linking)

2008), pp. 41-45, 1095-6859 (Electronic) 0090-8258 (Linking)

*of Obstetrics and Gynecology,* Vol. 182 (2000), pp. 1328-1334.

pp. 1839-1840, 0028-4793 (Print) 0028-4793 (Linking)

(Print) 0020-7292 (Linking)

237–45.

pp. 546.e1-546.e7

(Print) 0008-543X (Linking)

(Print) 0091-2751 (Linking)

0140-6736 (Print) 0140-6736 (Linking)

703X (Electronic) 1040-8746 (Linking)

Ngan, HY & Pecorelli, S (2006). Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. *International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics: The Official Organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics*, Vol. 95 Suppl 1 (Nov 2006), pp. S105-143, 0020-7292

CC; De Winter, KA; Lutgens, LC; van den Bergh, AC; van de Steen-Banasik, E; Beerman, H & van Lent, M (2000). Surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for patients with stage-1 endometrial carcinoma: multicentre randomised trial. PORTEC Study Group. Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma. *Lancet*, Vol. 355, No. 9213 (Apr 22 2000), pp. 1404-1411,

endometrial cancer and the importance of micrometastases. Surg Oncol 2008; 17:

cancer. *Current Opinion in Oncology,* Vol. 22, No. 5 (Sep 2010), pp. 487-491, 1531-

endometrial cancer: preoperative predictability, prognostic factors, and treatment outcome. *American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology,* Vol. 196, No. 6 (June 2007),

sampling in the diagnosis of patients with endometrial carcinoma and hyperplasia: a meta-analysis. *Cancer,* Vol. 89, No. 8 (Oct 15 2000), pp. 1765-1772, 0008-543X

*Journal of Clinical Ultrasound: JCU,* Vol. 32, No. 7 (Sep 2004), pp. 348-353, 0091-2751

endometrium. *The New England Journal of Medicine*, Vol. 337, No. 25 (Dec 18 1997),

Bodurka, DC (2004). Frozen section analyses as predictors of lymphatic spread in patients with early-stage uterine cancer. *Journal of the American College of Surgeons,* Vol. 199, No. 3 (Sep 2004), pp. 388-393, 1072-7515 (Print) 1072-7515 (Linking) Fujimoto, T; Fukuda, J & Tanaka, T (2009). Role of complete para-aortic lymphadenectomy

in endometrial cancer. *Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology*, Vol. 21, No. 1

the optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for endometrial cancer staging in the obese and morbidly obese woman? *Gynecologic Pncology*, Vol. 111, No. 1 (Oct


adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. *Gynecologic Oncology,* Vol. 92, No. 3 (Mar 2004), pp. 744-751, 0090-8258 (Print) 0090-8258 (Linking)


92, No. 3 (Mar 2004), pp. 744-751, 0090-8258 (Print) 0090-8258 (Linking) Kitchener, H; Swart, AM; Qian, Q; Amos, C & Parmar, MK (2009). Efficacy of systematic

Koper, NP; Massuger, LF; Thomas, CM; Kiemeney, LA & Verbeek, AL (1998). Serum CA 125

Kornblith, AB; Huang, HQ; Walker, JL; Spirtos, NM; Rotmensch, J & Cella, D. Quality of life

Larson, DM & Johnson, KK (1993). Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy for surgical

*obstétrique et biologie de la reproduction*, Vol. 26, No. 4 (1997), pp. 418-423 Lee, JH; Dubinsky, T; Andreotti, RF; Cardenes, HR; Dejesus Allison, SO; Gaffney, DK; Glanc,

*Oncology,* Vol. 27, No. 32 (Nov 2009), pp. 5337-5342

0140-6736 (Linking)

(Linking)

(Print) 0090-8258 (Linking)

adenocarcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. *Gynecologic Oncology,* Vol.

pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study. *Lancet*, Vol. 373, No. 9658 (Jan 10 2009), pp. 125-136, 1474-547X (Electronic)

measurements to identify patients with endometrial cancer who require lymphadenectomy. Anticancer Research, Vol. 18, No. 3B (May 1998), pp. 1897-1902.

of patients with endometrial cancer undergoing laparoscopic FIGO staging compared to laparotomy: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. *Journal of Clinical* 

staging of high-risk endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. *Gynecologic oncology*, Vol. 51, No. 3 (Dec 1993), pp. 345-348, 0090-8258 (Print) 0090-8258 (Linking) Lécuru, F; Neji, K; Robin, F; Darles, C; de Bièvre, P & Taurelle, R (1997). Lymphatic drainage

of the uterus. Preliminary results of an experimental study. *Journal de gynécologie,* 

P; Horowitz, NS; Jhingran, A; Lee, SI; Puthawala, AA; Royal, HD; Scoutt, LM; Small, W, Jr.; Varia, MA & Zelop, CM (2011). ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) Pretreatment Evaluation and Follow-Up of Endometrial Cancer of the Uterus. *Ultrasound Quarterly*, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Jun 2011), pp. 139-145, 1536-0253 (Electronic) 0894-8771 (Linking) Leitao, MM, Jr.; Kehoe, S; Barakat, RR; Alektiar, K; Gattoc, LP; Rabbitt, C; Chi, DS; Soslow,

RA & Abu-Rustum, NR (2009). Comparison of D&C and office endometrial biopsy accuracy in patients with FIGO grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma. *Gynecologic Oncology,* Vol. 113, No. 1 (Apr 2009), pp. 105-108, 1095-6859 (Electronic) 0090-8258

predicting lymph node spread in early stage endometrial cancer? *Surgical Oncology*, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Jun 2011), pp. e102-108, 1879-3320 (Electronic) 0960-7404 (Linking) Lutman, CV; Havrilesky, LJ; Cragun, JM; Secord, AA; Calingaert, B; Berchuck, A; Clarke-

Pearson, DL & Soper, JT (2006). Pelvic lymph node count is an important prognostic variable for FIGO stage I and II endometrial carcinoma with high-risk histology. *Gynecologic Oncology*, Vol. 102, No. 1 (Jul 2006), pp. 92-97, 0090-8258

(2008). Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging. *Gynecologic Oncology,* Vol. 109, No. 1 (Apr 2008),

Predictors of vaginal relapse in stage I endometrial cancer. *Gynecologic Oncology*,

Loubeyre, P; Undurraga, M; Bodmer, A & Petignat, P (2011). Non-invasive modalities for

Mariani, A; Dowdy, SC; Cliby, WA; Gostout, BS; Jones, MB; Wilson, TO & Podratz, KC

Mariani, A; Dowdy, SC; Keeney, GL; Haddock, MG; Lesnick, TG & Podratz, KC (2005).

Vol. 97, No. 3 (Jun 2005), pp. 820-827, 0090-8258 (Print) 0090-8258 (Linking)

pp. 11-18, 1095-6859 (Electronic) 0090-8258 (Linking)

