UNASSIGNED: Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is an effective treatment for testicular tumors. In recent years, with the development of robotics, many urological procedures performed via standard laparoscopy have been replaced by robots. Our objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) versus Non-robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (NR-RPLND) in testicular cancer.
UNASSIGNED: Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for literature on robotic surgery for testicular germ cell tumors up to April 2023. The statistical and sensitivity analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate mean difference (MD), odds ratio(OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) effect indicators.
UNASSIGNED: Eight studies with 3875 patients were finally included in this study, 453 with R-RPLND and 3422 with open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (O-RPLND)/laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (L-RPLND). The results showed that R-RPLND had lower rates of intraoperative blood loss (MD = -436.39; 95% CI -707.60 to -165.19; P = 0.002), transfusion (OR = 0.06; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.26; P = 0.0001), total postoperative complication rates (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.70; P = 0.002), and length of stay (MD=-3.74; 95% CI -4.69 to -2.78; P<0.00001). In addition, there were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding perioperative and oncological outcomes regarding total operative time, the incidence of postoperative complications grade≥III, abnormal ejaculation rate, lymph node yield, and postoperative recurrence rate.
UNASSIGNED: The R-RPLND and O-RPLND/L-RPLND provide safe and effective retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular cancer. Patients with R-RPLND have less intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospitalization period, fewer postoperative complications, and faster recovery. It should be considered a viable alternative to O-RPLND/L-RPLND.
UNASSIGNED: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023411696.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of L-RPLND, R-RPLND and O-RPLND, and determine which one can be the mainstream option.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 47 patients undergoing primary RPLND by three different surgical techniques for stage I-II NSGCT between July 2011 and April 2022 at our center. Standard open and laparoscopic RPLND was performed with usual equipment, and robotic RPLND was operated with da Vinci Si system.
RESULTS: Forty-seven patients underwent RPLND during 2011-2022, and 26 (55.3%) of them received L-RPLND, 14 (29.8%) were operated with robot, while 7 (14.9%) were performed O-RPLND. The median follow-up was 48.0 months, 48.0 months, and 60.0 months, respectively. The oncological outcomes were comparable among all groups. In L-RPLND group, there were 8 (30.8%) cases of low grade (Clavien I-II) complications, and 3 (11.5%) cases of high-grade (Clavien III-IV) complications. In R-RPLND group, one (7.1%) low-grade complication and four (28.6%) high-grade complications were observed. In O-RPLND group, there were 2 (28.5%) cases of low-grade complications and one case (14.2%) of high-grade one. The operation duration of L-RPLND was the shortest. In O-RPLND group, the number of positive lymph nodes were higher than other two groups. Patients undergoing open surgery had lower (p < 0.05) red blood cell count, hemoglobin level, and higher (p < 0.05) estimated blood loss, white blood cell count than those receiving either laparoscopic or robotic surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: All three surgical techniques are comparable in safety, oncological, andrological, and reproductive outcomes under the circumstance of not using primary chemotherapy. L-RPLND might be the most cost-effective option.

OBJECTIVE: To build nomogram incorporating potential prognostic factors for predicting survival outcomes of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) patients after resection of the primary tumor.
METHODS: Data of TGCT patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2010-2016) who underwent resection of the primary tumor were collected. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were analyzed by using Cox regression models, nomogram, Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank test.
RESULTS: We identified 7272 TGCT patients. Age at diagnosis, histology, tumor size, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system, and number of metastases sites were independent prognostic factors and were integrated into nomograms. The nomograms had higher C-indexes for both OS and CSS compared with the AJCC 7th staging system (0.881 vs 0.831 and 0.895 vs 0.856, respectively). Moreover, the new stratification of risk groups based on the nomograms showed a more significant distinction between Kaplan-Meier curves for survival outcomes than the AJCC staging system. Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection was associated with statistically improved survival probability in the nomogram middle-risk group in resected TGCT patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The novel nomogram-based staging system could provide satisfactory risk stratification and survival prediction ability beyond traditional AJCC staging systems.

A 38-year-old man presenting with left testicular mass and extensive retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy underwent radical orchiectomy and specimen showed a germ cell tumor of primarily primitive neuroectodermal tumor mixed with mature teratoma. He then underwent RPLND, followed by adjuvant CAV (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine) and IE (ifosfamide, etoposide) alternating chemotherapy given the high rate of recurrence and high rate of response to the PNET-specific chemotherapy.