La Lettre du Gynécologue - n ° 328-329 - janvier-février 2008
Dossier
Dossier
35
tion. En effet, elle permettrait non seulement d’augmenter la
sensibilité de l’examen extemporané en concentrant l’analyse
sur le(s) ganglions sentinelle(s), mais aussi d’identifier les 2 %
de patientes isolément N+ en lomboaortique (ganglion senti-
nelle au niveau lomboaortique). Conjointement à l’améliora-
tion des indications de la chirurgie ganglionnaire étendue à la
région lomboaortique, l’avènement de la laparoscopie permet
dans cette situation de diminuer la surmorbidité liée au CLA
comme l’ont démontré les résultats préliminaires de l’étude
rétrospective GOG-LAP2 (28).
Enfin, concernant les types histologiques à haut risque métas-
tatique tels que l’adénocarcinome à cellules claires et l’adéno-
carcinome séropapillaire, le CLA doit systématiquement être
discuté en fonction de l’état général de la patiente (29, 30).
La stadification chirurgicale doit faire partie intégrante du traite-
ment du cancer de l’endomètre avec réalisation d’un CLA en cas
de ganglions pelviens positifs, d’atteintes annexielle ou intra-abdo-
minale, surtout lorsque les conditions techniques sont favorables
c’est- à-dire sans risque opératoire ajouté. Pour les stades précoces
à haut risque (IC, grade 3), le but est d’identifier les 25 % de N+ pel-
viens en améliorant la sensibilité de l’examen extemporané, notam-
ment par l’évaluation de la technique du ganglion sentinelle.
n
Cancer de l’ovaire
– Stades précoces (sauf si IA grade I ou stade I mucineux) pour détecter les patien-
tes N+ et adapter le traitement
– Stades avancés si résection complète des lésions péritonéales et état général correct
Cancer du col
– N+ pelvien quelle que soit la taille de la lésion
– Tumeur de plus de 4 cm (IB2-II, bénéce plus discutable pour les stades III-IV) en
préthérapeutique
Cancer de l’endomètre (selon état général de la patiente)
– N+ pelvien
– Atteinte ovarienne
– Types histologiques rares : cellules claires et papillaires séreux
– À discuter pour les grades 3 et/ou IC
RéféRences bibliogRaphiques
1. Benedetti-Panici P, Maggioni A, Hacker N et al. Systematic aortic and pelvic
lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes in optimally debulked advanced
ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:560-6.
2. Chambers SK. Systematic lymphadenectomy in advanced epithelial ovarian can-
cer: two decades of uncertainty resolved. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(8):548-9.
3. Maggioni A, Benedetti Panici P et al. Randomised study of systematic lymphade-
nectomy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer macroscopically confined to the
pelvis. Br J Cancer 2006;95(6):699-704.
4. Morice P, Joulie F, Camatte S et al. Lymph node involvement in epithelial ovarian
cancer: analysis of 276 pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomies and surgical im-
plications. J Am Coll Surg 2003;197(2):198-205.
5. Cliby WA, Aletti GD, Wilson TO, Podratz KC. Is it justified to classify patients
to Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer based on nodal involvement only? Gynecol
Oncol 2006;103(3):797-801.
6. Onda T, Yoshikawa H, Yasugi T et al. Patients with ovarian carcinoma upstaged
to stage III after systematic lymphadenectomy have similar survival to stage I/II pa-
tients and superior survival to other Stage III patients. Cancer 1998;83(8):1555-60.
7. Hill C, Doyon F. e frequency of cancer in France: all ages and under age 15,
mortality in 2003 and trends since 1968. Bull. Cancer 2007; 94:7-13A.
8. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB et al. Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hys-
terectomy compared with radiation and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB
cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1154-61.
9. Peters WA, Liu PY, Barrett RJ et al. Concurrent chemotherapy and pelvic ra-
diation therapy compared with pelvic radiation therapy alone as adjuvant the-
rapy after radical surgery in high-risk early-stage cancer of the cervix. J Clin Oncol
2000;18:1606-13.
10. Nelson JH Jr, Boyce J, Macasaet M et al. Incidence, significance, and follow-up
of para-aortic lymph node metastases in late invasive carcinoma of the cervix. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 1977;128(3):336-40.
11. Delpech Y, Haie-Meder C, Rey A et al. Para-aortic involvement and interest of
para-aortic lymphadenectomy after chemoradiation therapy in patients with stage
IB2 and II cervical carcinoma radiologically confined to the pelvic cavity. Ann Surg
Oncol 2007;14(11):3223-31.
12. Rotman M, Pajak TF, Choi K et al. Prophylactic extended-field irradiation of
para-aortic lymph nodes in stages IIB and bulky IB and IIA cervical carcinomas.
Ten-year treatment results of RTOG 79-20. JAMA 1995;274(5):387-93.
13. Lai CH, Huang KG, Hong JH et al. Randomized trial of surgical staging (ex-
traperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical
cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2003;89:160-7.
14. Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS et al. Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic reso-
nance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the
presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical
carcinoma: a prospective study. Cancer 2006;106(4):914-22.
15. Havrilesky LJ, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB, Myers ER. FDG-PET for manage-
ment of cervical and ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2005;97(1):183-91.
16. Lurain JR, Rice BL, Rademaker AW et al. Prognostic factors associated with
recurrence in clinical stage I adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Obstet Gynecol
1991;78:63-9.
17. Ben-Shachar I, Pavelka J, Cohn DE et al. Surgical staging for patients presenting
with grade 1 endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:487-93.
18. Lo KW, Cheung TH, Yu MY, Yim SF, Chung TK. e value of pelvic and para-
aortic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer to avoid unnecessary radiotherapy.
Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13:863-9.
19. Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ et al. Relationship between surgical-patho-
logical risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endome-
trium: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 1991;40:55-65.
20. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN et al. Surgical pathologic spread patterns
of endometrial cancer: a gynecologic oncologic group study. Cancer 1987;60:2035-41.
21. Chan JK, Wu H, Cheung MK, Shin JY, Osann K, Kapp DS. e outcomes of
27,063 women with unstaged endometriod cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;106:282-8.
22. Chan JK, Cheung MK, Huh WK et al. erapeutic role of lymph node resection
in endometrioid corpus cancer: a study of 12 333 patients. Cancer 2006;107:1823-30.
23. Fujimoto T, Nanjyo H, Nakamura A et al. Para-aortic lymphadenectomy may
improve disease-related survival in patients with multipositive pelvic lymph node
stage IIIc endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;107(2):253-9.
24. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Galli L, Podratz KC. Potential therapeutic role of para-
aortic lymphadenectomy in node-positive endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol
2000;76:348-56.
25. Bristow RE, Zerbe MJ, Rosenshein NB et al., Stage IVB endometrial carcino-
ma: the role of cytoreductive surgery and determinants of survival. Gynecol Oncol
2000;78:85-91.
26. Cragun JM, Havrilesky LJ, Calingaert B et al. Retrospective analysis of selec-
tive lymphadenectomy in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol
2005;23:3668-75.
27. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller
PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic
Oncology Group Study, Cancer 1987;60(Suppl.8):2035-41.
28. Walker JL, Piedmonte M, Spirtos N et al. Surgical staging of uterine cancer:
randomized phase III trial of laparoscopy vs laparotomy-a Gynecologic Onco-
logy Group Study (GOG): preliminary results. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2006;
24:(abstr 5010).
29. Cirisano FD, Robboy SJ jr, Dodge RK et al. e outcome of stage I-II clini-
cally and surgically staged papillary serous and clear cell endometrial cancers
when compared with endometrioid carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77:55-65.
30. Gehrig PA, Groben PA, Fowler WC jr et al. Noninvasive papillary serous
carcinoma of the endometrium. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:153-7.