Log in

Operation hämatogener Metastasen

Gründe dagegen

Resecting hematogenous metastases

Reasons against

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die urologischen Tumoren machen ca. 40 % aller soliden Tumorentitäten aus. 30 % der Patienten entwickeln synchrone oder metachrone Organmetastasen. Die Metastasenresektion verbessert in Abhängigkeit der Tumorentität und -charakteristika das Überleben der Patienten. Die Metastasenchirurgie ist ein fester Bestandteil des multimodalen Therapiekonzepts der Patienten mit nicht-seminomatösen Keimzelltumoren im fortgeschrittenen Stadium. Nur die chirurgische Inoperabilität spricht gegen eine Metastasenresektion. Die Resektion hämatogener Metastasen beim Nierenzellkarzinom gehört seit Jahrzehnten zur Standardtherapie. Die Patientenselektion ist der entscheidende Faktor für einen Überlebensvorteil. Wichtige Prognostikatoren stellen Allgemeinzustand, Metastasenanzahl, -lokalisation, und -größe dar, die zur Konsultation und Selektion der Patienten beitragen. Nur bei einem Ansprechen auf eine systemische Therapie sollten Metastasen im individuellen Fall beim Urothelkarzinom oder Peniskarzinom entfernt werden. Die aktuellen Leitlinien und die Literatur sprechen gegen eine Resektion von hämatogenen Metastasen des Prostatakarzinoms. In diesem Artikel werden Gründe gegen eine Metastasenresektion in Anlehnung an aktuelle Leitlinien und Literaturangaben dargestellt.

Abstract

Urological malignancies represent approximately 40 % of all solid tumors. Synchronous or metachronous organ metastases develop in 30 % of patients. Depending on the tumor entity and tumor characteristics, resection of metastases can improve patient survival. Surgical resection of residual tumors is an integral part of the multimodal therapy concept of patients with nonseminomatous metastatic germ-cell cancer. Surgical inoperability is the only reason not to resect. Resection of hematogenous metastases from renal cell carcinoma has been postulated as a standard therapy for decades. Appropriate patient selection is the key for a survival benefit. Prognosticators such as patient’s general condition as well as number, location, and size of metastases help to counsel and select patients accordingly. Metastases of transitional cell or penile carcinoma should only be resected when a response to systemic treatment is evident in the individual case. There is no evidence in favor of resecting organ-metastases of prostate cancer in the current guidelines and the literature. In this article, arguments against resection of metastases following the current literature and guidelines are described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literatur

  1. Abe T, Kitamura H, Obara W et al (2013) Outcome of metastasectomy for urothelial carcinoma: a multi-institutional retrospective study in Japan. J Urol 190(5):1957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Albers P, Albrecht W, Algaba F et al (2011) EAU guidelines on testicular cancer: 2011 update. Eur Urol 60:304–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alt AL, Boorjian SA, Lohse CM et al (2011) Survival after complete surgical resection of multiple metastases from renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 117:2873–2882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Beisland C, Medby PC, Beisland HO (2004) Presumed radically treated renal cell carcinoma – recurrence of the disease and prognostic factors for subsequent survival. Scand J Urol Nephrol 38:299–305

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J et al (2014) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 65:467–479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Heidenreich A, Wilop S, Pinkawa M et al (2012) Surgical resection of urological tumor metastases following medical treatment. Dtsch Arztebl Int 109:631–637

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Herr HW, Donat SM, Bajorin DF (2001) Post-chemotherapy surgery in patients with unresectable or regionally metastatic bladder cancer. J Urol 165:811–814

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kudelin N, Bolukbas S, Eberlein M, Schirren J (2013) Metastasectomy with standardized lymph node dissection for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an 11-year single-center experience. Ann Thorac Surg 96:265–270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lehmann J, Suttmann H, Albers P et al (2009) Surgery for metastatic urothelial carcinoma with curative intent: the German experience (AUO AB 30/05). Eur Urol 55:1293–1299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leijte JA, Gallee M, Antonini N, Horenblas S (2008) Evaluation of current TNM classification of penile carcinoma. J Urol 180:933–938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ljungberg B, Cowan NC, Hanbury DC et al (2010) EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: the 2010 update. Eur Urol 58:398–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Margulis V, Shariat SF, Rapoport Y et al (2013) Development of accurate models for individualized prediction of survival after cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 63:947–952

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Meimarakis G, Angele M, Staehler M et al (2011) Evaluation of a new prognostic score (Munich score) to predict long-term survival after resection of pulmonary renal cell carcinoma metastases. Am J Surg 202:158–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mekhail TM, Abou-Jawde RM, Boumerhi G et al (2005) Validation and extension of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering prognostic factors model for survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 23:832–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nieder C, Astner ST, Andratschke NH, Marienhagen K (2011) Postoperative treatment and prognosis of patients with resected single brain metastasis: how useful are established prognostic scores? Clin Neurol Neurosurg 113:98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ohlmann CH, Siemer S, Stockle M (2012) Resection of metastases from prostate cancer. Urologe A 51:363–367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pettaway CA, Pagliaro L, Theodore C, Haas G (2010) Treatment of visceral, unresectable, or bulky/unresectable regional metastases of penile cancer. Urology 76:58–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pezaro CJ, Omlin A, Lorente D et al (2014) Visceral disease in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 65:270–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schirren J, Trainer S, Eberlein M et al (2012) The role of residual tumor resection in the management of nonseminomatous germ cell cancer of testicular origin. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 60:405–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Staehler MD, Kruse J, Haseke N et al (2010) Liver resection for metastatic disease prolongs survival in renal cell carcinoma: 12-year results from a retrospective comparative analysis. World J Urol 28:543–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stenzl A, Cowan NC, De Santis M et al (2011) Treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: update of the EAU guidelines. Eur Urol 59:1009–1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Thelen A, Jonas S, Benckert C et al (2007) Liver resection for metastases from renal cell carcinoma. World J Surg 31:802–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tosco L, Van Poppel H, Frea B et al (2013) Survival and impact of clinical prognostic factors in surgically treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 63:646–652

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ulmar B, Catalkaya S, Naumann U et al (2006) Surgical treatment and evaluation of prognostic factors in spinal metastases of renal cell carcinoma. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 144:58–67

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Maase H von der, Hansen SW, Roberts JT et al (2000) Gemcitabine and cisplatin versus methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: results of a large, randomized, multinational, multicenter, phase III study. J Clin Oncol 18:3068–3077

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wan L, Pantel K, Kang Y (2013) Tumor metastasis: moving new biological insights into the clinic. Nat Med 19:1450–1464

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Winter C, Pfister D, Busch J et al (2012) Residual tumor size and IGCCCG risk classification predict additional vascular procedures in patients with germ cell tumors and residual tumor resection: a multicenter analysis of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. Eur Urol 61:403–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. F.C. Roos und J.W. Thüroff geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Der Beitrag enthält keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F.C. Roos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roos, F., Thüroff, J. Operation hämatogener Metastasen. Urologe 53, 817–822 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3467-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3467-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation