ABSTRACT Introduction: Concerns about the long-term toxicity of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in stage II seminoma have renewed the interest in the surgical management. Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) has emerged as a potential treatment alternative. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) evaluates the oncological, functional, and peri-operative outcomes of RPLND in stage II seminoma. Methods: A SRMA (systematic review and meta-analysis) of prospective studies was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies included prospective trials assessing RPLND in stage II seminoma. Outcomes analyzed were relapse-free survival (RFS), recurrence patterns, functional outcomes, and peri-operative complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–-Ottawa Scale. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250559629). Results: Four prospective phase II studies with 216 patients were included. The pooled 2-year RFS was 85% (95% confidence interval CI: 77.8%–-92.2%). In-field recurrence occurred in 5.5%, while the rate of out-of-field recurrence was 10.1%. Preservation of antegrade ejaculation was achieved in 92.8% (95% CI: 87.4%–-98.1%). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIA) were reported in 9.6% of the patients. Risk of bias was low to moderate across the studies. Conclusions: Primary RPLND is a feasible and safe treatment for carefully selected patients with stage II seminoma, providing favorable oncological control, high rates of functional preservation, and acceptable morbidity. While short-term outcomes are encouraging, long-term follow-up and randomized comparisons with conventional therapy are required to establish its definitive role.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Akash Mor
Akash Pawar
Hetakshi Shah
Indian Journal of Urology
University of California, San Diego
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
University of California System
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Mor et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69ca134b883daed6ee0953fe — DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/iju.iju_430_25
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: