Long-term follow-up of comparative study of open and endoscopic lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma
Background Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy Jg. 38; H. 1; S. 179 - 185 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
New York
Springer US
01.01.2024
Springer Nature B.V |
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 0930-2794, 1432-2218, 1432-2218 |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Abstract | Background
Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma.
Methods
The study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups.
Results
The two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml,
P
< 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively,
P
< 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group,
P
< 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively,
P
< 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different.
Conclusions
The study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon’s experience, what they like, and what resources are available. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | BackgroundPenile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma.MethodsThe study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups.ResultsThe two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different.ConclusionsThe study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon’s experience, what they like, and what resources are available. Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma.BACKGROUNDPenile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma.The study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups.METHODSThe study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups.The two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different.RESULTSThe two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different.The study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon's experience, what they like, and what resources are available.CONCLUSIONSThe study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon's experience, what they like, and what resources are available. Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma. The study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different. The study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon's experience, what they like, and what resources are available. Background Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is radical inguinal lymphadenectomy, but it has a high rate of complications. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term outcomes of endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy and open inguinal lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma. Methods The study included patients diagnosed with penile carcinoma who underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 23) or endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (n = 27) at a single hospital between January 2013 and January 2021. Operation time, blood loss, drainage, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and survival rates were assessed and compared between the two groups. Results The two groups were comparable in terms of age, tumor size and stage, inguinal lymph nodes, and follow-up. The endoscopic group had significantly lower blood loss (27.1 ± 1.5 ml vs 55.0 ± 2.7 ml, P < 0.05), shorter drainage time and hospital stay (4.7 ± 1.1 days vs 8.1 ± 2.2 days, and 13.4 ± 1.0 days vs 19 ± 2.0 days, respectively, P < 0.05), and longer operation time compared to the open group (82.2 ± 4.3 min in endoscopic group vs 53.1 ± 2.2 min in open group, P < 0.05). There were significant differences in the incidence of incisional infection, necrosis, and lymphorrhagia in both groups (4 vs 0, 4 vs 0, and 2 vs 0, respectively, P < 0.05). The inguinal lymph node harvested was comparable between the two groups. The mean follow-up time was similar for both groups (60.4 ± 7.7 m vs 59.8 ± 7.3 m), and the recurrence mortality rates were not significantly different. Conclusions The study shows that both open and endoscopic methods work well for controlling penile carcinoma in the long term. But the endoscopic approach is better because it has fewer severe complications. So, the choice of surgery method might depend on factors like the surgeon’s experience, what they like, and what resources are available. |
| Author | Zhou, Xue-Lu |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Xue-Lu orcidid: 0000-0003-1023-0611 surname: Zhou fullname: Zhou, Xue-Lu email: zhouxuelulu@sina.com organization: Department of Surgery, Chashan Hospital of Guangdong Medical University |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37950029$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kUtv1DAURi1URB_wB1ggS2zYGPyK7awQqnhJI7GBteU4NzOuEju1k1bz7-thSoEuurJkn3P9XX3n6CSmCAi9ZvQ9o1R_KJRKJQnlgjDaSE7MM3TGpOCEc2ZO0BltBSVct_IUnZdyRSvfsuYFOhW6bSjl7Rm63qS4JQvkCQ9pHNMtWWecBuzTNLvslnADuCxrvz9cphkidrHHEPtUfJqDx-N-mneuhwh-SdMeh4jnqkFcCr4Nyw5XJ4yAvcs-xDS5l-j54MYCr-7PC_Try-efl9_I5sfX75efNsRL3SzEc-9ADlopp3pOlRjqMhSEG7wyvnOdEFx2XrWmhaHpmgZaEOA1iEFo2nTiAn08zp3XboLe10TZjXbOYXJ5b5ML9v-XGHZ2m24so1orqXid8O5-Qk7XK5TFTqF4GEcXIa3FcmNaLoyRuqJvH6FXac2x7md5yzijnAtVqTf_RnrI8qeOCvAj4HMqJcPwgDBqD53bY-e2dm5_d25NlcwjyYelVpAOa4XxaVUc1VL_iVvIf2M_Yd0BbFrDDA |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1007_s00345_025_05509_4 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1097/01.ju.0000131453.52463.8f 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)35222-9 10.1089/end.2012.0437 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.140 10.1007/s40487-020-00135-z 10.1016/S0022-5347(18)35003-1 10.1007/s11701-018-0823-4 10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.041 10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.016 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.033 10.1007/s11864-020-00802-3 10.1136/bmj.329.7477.1272 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2015.0416 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.09.010 10.1155/2011/952532 10.1186/s12893-023-01935-6 10.1002/cncr.25091 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960515)77:10<2099::AID-CNCR20>3.0.CO;2-P 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.11.015 10.1016/j.euf.2022.01.018 10.21037/tau.2017.06.05 10.1097/SPC.0b013e32833efcca 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.06.031 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2021.99.14 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65169-5 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | The Author(s) 2023 2023. The Author(s). The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s) 2023 – notice: 2023. The Author(s). – notice: The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| DBID | C6C AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7RV 7X7 7XB 88E 8AO 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA BENPR CCPQU FYUFA GHDGH K9. KB0 M0S M1P NAPCQ PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI 7X8 5PM |
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-023-10542-8 |
| DatabaseName | Springer Nature OA Free Journals CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Nursing & Allied Health Database Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest Hospital Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central ProQuest One Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Health & Medical Collection Medical Database Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic (retired) ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source (Alumni) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7RV name: Nursing & Allied Health Database url: https://search.proquest.com/nahs sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1432-2218 |
| EndPage | 185 |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC10776462 37950029 10_1007_s00464_023_10542_8 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | --- -53 -5E -5G -BR -EM -Y2 -~C .86 .GJ .VR 06C 06D 0R~ 0VY 123 199 1N0 1SB 203 28- 29Q 29~ 2J2 2JN 2JY 2KG 2KM 2LR 2P1 2VQ 2~H 30V 36B 3V. 4.4 406 408 409 40D 40E 53G 5QI 5RE 5VS 67Z 6NX 6PF 78A 7RV 7X7 88E 8AO 8FI 8FJ 8TC 8UJ 95- 95. 95~ 96X AAAVM AABHQ AACDK AAHNG AAIAL AAJBT AAJKR AANXM AANZL AAQQT AARHV AARTL AASML AATNV AATVU AAUYE AAWCG AAWTL AAYIU AAYQN AAYTO AAYZH ABAKF ABBBX ABBXA ABDZT ABECU ABFTV ABHLI ABHQN ABIPD ABJNI ABJOX ABKCH ABKTR ABLJU ABMNI ABMQK ABNWP ABOCM ABPLI ABQSL ABSXP ABTEG ABTKH ABTMW ABULA ABUWG ABWNU ABXPI ACAOD ACBXY ACDTI ACGFS ACHSB ACHVE ACHXU ACKNC ACMDZ ACMLO ACOKC ACOMO ACPIV ACUDM ACZOJ ADBBV ADHHG ADHIR ADIMF ADINQ ADJJI ADKNI ADKPE ADRFC ADTPH ADURQ ADYFF ADZKW AEBTG AEFIE AEFQL AEGAL AEGNC AEJHL AEJRE AEKMD AEMSY AENEX AEOHA AEPYU AESKC AETLH AEVLU AEXYK AFBBN AFEXP AFJLC AFKRA AFLOW AFQWF AFZKB AGAYW AGDGC AGGDS AGJBK AGMZJ AGQEE AGQMX AGRTI AGVAE AGWIL AGWZB AGYKE AHAVH AHBYD AHIZS AHMBA AHSBF AHYZX AIAKS AIGIU AIIXL AILAN AITGF AJBLW AJRNO AJZVZ AKMHD ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALWAN AMKLP AMXSW AMYLF AMYQR AOCGG ARMRJ ASPBG AVWKF AXYYD AZFZN B-. BA0 BBWZM BDATZ BENPR BGNMA BKEYQ BPHCQ BSONS BVXVI C6C CAG CCPQU COF CS3 CSCUP DDRTE DL5 DNIVK DPUIP DU5 EBD EBLON EBS EIOEI EJD EMB EMOBN EN4 ESBYG EX3 F5P FERAY FFXSO FIGPU FINBP FNLPD FRRFC FSGXE FWDCC FYUFA G-Y G-Z GGCAI GGRSB GJIRD GNWQR GQ6 GQ7 GQ8 GRRUI GXS H13 HF~ HG5 HG6 HMCUK HMJXF HQYDN HRMNR HZ~ I09 IHE IJ- IKXTQ IMOTQ ITM IWAJR IXC IZIGR IZQ I~X I~Z J-C J0Z JBSCW JCJTX JZLTJ KDC KOV KOW KPH L7B LAS LLZTM M1P M4Y MA- N2Q N9A NAPCQ NB0 NDZJH NPVJJ NQJWS NU0 O9- O93 O9G O9I O9J OAM P19 P9S PF0 PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PT4 PT5 Q2X QOK QOR QOS R4E R89 R9I RHV RIG RNI ROL RPX RRX RSV RZK S16 S1Z S26 S27 S28 S37 S3B SAP SCLPG SDE SDH SDM SHX SISQX SJYHP SMD SNE SNPRN SNX SOHCF SOJ SPISZ SRMVM SSLCW SSXJD STPWE SV3 SZ9 SZN T13 T16 TSG TSK TSV TT1 TUC U2A U9L UG4 UKHRP UOJIU UTJUX UZXMN VC2 VFIZW W23 W48 WH7 WJK WK8 WOW YLTOR Z45 Z7U Z7X Z82 Z83 Z87 Z88 Z8O Z8R Z8V Z8W Z91 Z92 ZMTXR ZOVNA ~EX AAPKM AAYXX ABBRH ABDBE ABFSG ABRTQ ACSTC ADHKG AEZWR AFDZB AFFHD AFHIU AFOHR AGQPQ AHPBZ AHWEU AIXLP ATHPR AYFIA CITATION PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PPXIY CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7XB 8FK K9. PKEHL PQEST PQUKI 7X8 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-c2cae4f766a6d2063f9300e3afc68cbab3324bc6989ef5b55e9e3ec7e3f3705b3 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7RV |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 1 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=001101707800002&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
| IngestDate | Tue Nov 04 02:06:10 EST 2025 Sun Nov 09 11:18:29 EST 2025 Wed Nov 05 00:47:26 EST 2025 Wed Feb 19 02:12:08 EST 2025 Tue Nov 18 22:14:17 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 05:31:35 EST 2025 Fri Feb 21 02:41:09 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 1 |
| Keywords | Endoscopy Penile carcinoma Inguinal lymphadenectomy Open |
| Language | English |
| License | 2023. The Author(s). Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c475t-c2cae4f766a6d2063f9300e3afc68cbab3324bc6989ef5b55e9e3ec7e3f3705b3 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-1023-0611 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00464-023-10542-8 |
| PMID | 37950029 |
| PQID | 2912102236 |
| PQPubID | 31812 |
| PageCount | 7 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10776462 proquest_miscellaneous_2889238847 proquest_journals_2912102236 pubmed_primary_37950029 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_023_10542_8 crossref_citationtrail_10_1007_s00464_023_10542_8 springer_journals_10_1007_s00464_023_10542_8 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2024-01-01 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2024-01-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 01 year: 2024 text: 2024-01-01 day: 01 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | New York |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: New York – name: Germany |
| PublicationSubtitle | And Other Interventional Techniques |
| PublicationTitle | Surgical endoscopy |
| PublicationTitleAbbrev | Surg Endosc |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Surg Endosc |
| PublicationYear | 2024 |
| Publisher | Springer US Springer Nature B.V |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Springer US – name: Springer Nature B.V |
| References | Koifman, Hampl, Koifman, Vides, Ornellas (CR22) 2013; 190 Lopes, Rossi, Fonseca, Morini (CR5) 1996; 77 Azevedo, Roxo, Alvares, Baptista, Favorito (CR23) 2021; 47 Biyani, Pecanka, Rouprêt, Jensen, Mitropoulos (CR10) 2020; 77 Johnson, Hsiao, Delman, Jani, Brawley, Master (CR16) 2010; 116 Ahmed, Khalil, Kamel, Karnes, Spiess (CR13) 2020; 22 de Carvalho, Patrício, Medeiros, Sampaio, Favorito (CR15) 2011; 2011 Diorio, Leone, Spiess (CR21) 2016; 96 Bevan-Thomas, Slaton, Pettaway (CR25) 2002; 167 Zhou, Zhan, Zhan, Zhou, Yuan (CR4) 2013; 27 Cacciamani, Sholklapper, Dell’Oglio, Rocco, Annino, Antonelli (CR9) 2022; 8 Yao, Tu, Li, Qin, Liu, Zhou, Han (CR3) 2010; 184 Sanchez, Fernandez-Nestosa, Cañete-Portillo, Cubilla (CR12) 2022; 40 Aita, Zequi, Costa, Guimarães, Soares, Giuliangelis (CR20) 2016; 42 Ornellas, Seixas, Marota, Wisnescky, Campos, de Moraes (CR18) 1994; 151 Yang, Liu, Tan, Hu, Liu, Wei, Deng, Zhou, Yang, Duan, Zheng, Li, Chen, Zhou, Zheng (CR2) 2023; 23 Mitropoulos, Artibani, Graefen, Remzi, Rouprêt, Truss (CR11) 2011; 61 Swan, Furniss, Cassell (CR14) 2004; 329 Korkes, Moniz, Castro, Guidoni, Fernanders, Perez (CR6) 2009; 16 Gkegkes, Minis, Lavazzo (CR1) 2018; 13 Tobias-Machado, Tavares, Molina, Zambon, Forsetto, Juliano, Wroclawski (CR7) 2005; 173 Stecca, Alt, Jiang, Chung, Crook, Kulkarni, Sridhar (CR19) 2021; 9 Nelson, Cookson, Smith, Chang (CR17) 2004; 172 Delacroix, Pettaway (CR26) 2010; 4 Elsamra, Poch (CR8) 2017; 6 Chahoud, Kohli, Spiess (CR24) 2021; 96 CE Stecca (10542_CR19) 2021; 9 R Bevan-Thomas (10542_CR25) 2002; 167 TV Johnson (10542_CR16) 2010; 116 AA Ornellas (10542_CR18) 1994; 151 M Tobias-Machado (10542_CR7) 2005; 173 RA Azevedo (10542_CR23) 2021; 47 JP de Carvalho (10542_CR15) 2011; 2011 SE Delacroix Jr (10542_CR26) 2010; 4 F Korkes (10542_CR6) 2009; 16 D Mitropoulos (10542_CR11) 2011; 61 ID Gkegkes (10542_CR1) 2018; 13 GA Aita (10542_CR20) 2016; 42 K Yao (10542_CR3) 2010; 184 GE Cacciamani (10542_CR9) 2022; 8 GJ Diorio (10542_CR21) 2016; 96 L Koifman (10542_CR22) 2013; 190 DF Sanchez (10542_CR12) 2022; 40 ME Ahmed (10542_CR13) 2020; 22 J Chahoud (10542_CR24) 2021; 96 MC Swan (10542_CR14) 2004; 329 M Yang (10542_CR2) 2023; 23 BA Nelson (10542_CR17) 2004; 172 XL Zhou (10542_CR4) 2013; 27 A Lopes (10542_CR5) 1996; 77 CS Biyani (10542_CR10) 2020; 77 SE Elsamra (10542_CR8) 2017; 6 |
| References_xml | – volume: 172 start-page: 494 issue: 2 year: 2004 end-page: 497 ident: CR17 article-title: Complications of inguinal and pelvic lymphadenectomy for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: a contemporary series publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000131453.52463.8f – volume: 151 start-page: 1244 issue: 5 year: 1994 end-page: 1249 ident: CR18 article-title: Surgical treatment of invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: retrospective analysis of 350 cases publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)35222-9 – volume: 27 start-page: 657 issue: 5 year: 2013 end-page: 661 ident: CR4 article-title: Endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma and genital malignancy: a preliminary report publication-title: J Endourol doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0437 – volume: 184 start-page: 546 issue: 2 year: 2010 end-page: 552 ident: CR3 article-title: Modified technique of radical inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma: morbidity and outcome publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.140 – volume: 9 start-page: 21 issue: 1 year: 2021 end-page: 39 ident: CR19 article-title: Recent advances in the management of penile cancer: a contemporary review of the literature publication-title: Oncol Ther doi: 10.1007/s40487-020-00135-z – volume: 173 start-page: 226 year: 2005 ident: CR7 article-title: Comparative study between video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and standard open procedure for penile cancer: preliminary surgical and oncological results [abstract] publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(18)35003-1 – volume: 13 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2018 end-page: 8 ident: CR1 article-title: Robotic-assisted inguinal lymphadenectomy: a systematic review publication-title: J Robot Surg doi: 10.1007/s11701-018-0823-4 – volume: 96 start-page: 15 year: 2016 end-page: 21 ident: CR21 article-title: Management of penile cancer publication-title: Urology doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.041 – volume: 190 start-page: 2086 issue: 6 year: 2013 end-page: 2092 ident: CR22 article-title: Radical open inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma: surgical technique, early complications and late outcomes publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.016 – volume: 61 start-page: 341 issue: 2 year: 2011 end-page: 349 ident: CR11 article-title: Reporting and grading of complications after urologic surgical procedures: an ad hoc EAU guidelines panel assessment and recommendations publication-title: Eur Urol doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.033 – volume: 22 start-page: 4 issue: 1 year: 2020 ident: CR13 article-title: Progress on management of penile cancer in 2020 publication-title: Curr Treat Opt Oncol doi: 10.1007/s11864-020-00802-3 – volume: 329 start-page: 1272 issue: 7477 year: 2004 end-page: 1276 ident: CR14 article-title: Surgical management of metastatic inguinal lymphadenopathy publication-title: BMJ doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7477.1272 – volume: 42 start-page: 1136 issue: 6 year: 2016 end-page: 1143 ident: CR20 article-title: Tumor histologic grade is the most important prognostic factor in patients with penile cancer and clinically negative lymph nodes not submitted to regional lymphadenectomy publication-title: Int Braz J Urol doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2015.0416 – volume: 40 start-page: 215 issue: 6 year: 2022 end-page: 222 ident: CR12 article-title: Evolving insights into penile cancer pathology and the eighth edition of the AJCC TNM staging system publication-title: Urol Oncol doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.09.010 – volume: 2011 start-page: 952532 year: 2011 ident: CR15 article-title: Anatomic aspects of inguinal lymph nodes applied to lymphadenectomy in penile cancer publication-title: Adv Urol doi: 10.1155/2011/952532 – volume: 23 start-page: 55 issue: 1 year: 2023 ident: CR2 article-title: Comparison of antegrade robotic assisted VS laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer publication-title: BMC Surg doi: 10.1186/s12893-023-01935-6 – volume: 116 start-page: 2960 issue: 12 year: 2010 end-page: 2966 ident: CR16 article-title: Extensive inguinal lymphadenectomy improves overall 5-year survival in penile cancer patients: results from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/cncr.25091 – volume: 77 start-page: 2099 issue: 10 year: 1996 end-page: 2102 ident: CR5 article-title: Unreliability of modified inguinal lymphadenectomy for clinical staging of penile carcinoma publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960515)77:10<2099::AID-CNCR20>3.0.CO;2-P – volume: 77 start-page: 601 issue: 5 year: 2020 end-page: 610 ident: CR10 article-title: Intraoperative adverse incident classification (EAUiaiC) by the European Association of Urology ad hoc Complications guidelines panel publication-title: Eur Urol doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.11.015 – volume: 8 start-page: 1847 issue: 6 year: 2022 end-page: 1858 ident: CR9 article-title: The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) global surgical collaboration project: development of criteria for reporting adverse events during surgical procedures and evaluating their impact on the postoperative course publication-title: Eur Urol Focus doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.01.018 – volume: 6 start-page: 826 issue: 5 year: 2017 end-page: 832 ident: CR8 article-title: Robotic inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: the why, how, and what publication-title: Transl Androl Urol doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.06.05 – volume: 16 start-page: 33 issue: 1 year: 2009 end-page: 36 ident: CR6 article-title: Modified inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile carcinoma has no advantages publication-title: J Androl Sci – volume: 4 start-page: 285 issue: 4 year: 2010 end-page: 292 ident: CR26 article-title: Therapeutic strategies for advanced penile carcinoma publication-title: Curr Opin Support Palliat Care doi: 10.1097/SPC.0b013e32833efcca – volume: 96 start-page: 720 issue: 3 year: 2021 end-page: 732 ident: CR24 article-title: Management of advanced penile cancer publication-title: Mayo Clin Proc doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.06.031 – volume: 47 start-page: 1108 issue: 6 year: 2021 end-page: 1119 ident: CR23 article-title: Use of flaps in inguinal lymphadenectomy in metastatic penile cancer publication-title: Int Braz J Urol doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2021.99.14 – volume: 167 start-page: 1638 issue: 4 year: 2002 end-page: 1642 ident: CR25 article-title: Contemporary morbidity from lymphadenectomy for penile squamous cell carcinoma: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Experience publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65169-5 – volume: 23 start-page: 55 issue: 1 year: 2023 ident: 10542_CR2 publication-title: BMC Surg doi: 10.1186/s12893-023-01935-6 – volume: 8 start-page: 1847 issue: 6 year: 2022 ident: 10542_CR9 publication-title: Eur Urol Focus doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.01.018 – volume: 16 start-page: 33 issue: 1 year: 2009 ident: 10542_CR6 publication-title: J Androl Sci – volume: 173 start-page: 226 year: 2005 ident: 10542_CR7 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(18)35003-1 – volume: 42 start-page: 1136 issue: 6 year: 2016 ident: 10542_CR20 publication-title: Int Braz J Urol doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2015.0416 – volume: 22 start-page: 4 issue: 1 year: 2020 ident: 10542_CR13 publication-title: Curr Treat Opt Oncol doi: 10.1007/s11864-020-00802-3 – volume: 9 start-page: 21 issue: 1 year: 2021 ident: 10542_CR19 publication-title: Oncol Ther doi: 10.1007/s40487-020-00135-z – volume: 96 start-page: 720 issue: 3 year: 2021 ident: 10542_CR24 publication-title: Mayo Clin Proc doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.06.031 – volume: 151 start-page: 1244 issue: 5 year: 1994 ident: 10542_CR18 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)35222-9 – volume: 13 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2018 ident: 10542_CR1 publication-title: J Robot Surg doi: 10.1007/s11701-018-0823-4 – volume: 184 start-page: 546 issue: 2 year: 2010 ident: 10542_CR3 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.140 – volume: 27 start-page: 657 issue: 5 year: 2013 ident: 10542_CR4 publication-title: J Endourol doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0437 – volume: 6 start-page: 826 issue: 5 year: 2017 ident: 10542_CR8 publication-title: Transl Androl Urol doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.06.05 – volume: 77 start-page: 2099 issue: 10 year: 1996 ident: 10542_CR5 publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960515)77:10<2099::AID-CNCR20>3.0.CO;2-P – volume: 77 start-page: 601 issue: 5 year: 2020 ident: 10542_CR10 publication-title: Eur Urol doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.11.015 – volume: 40 start-page: 215 issue: 6 year: 2022 ident: 10542_CR12 publication-title: Urol Oncol doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.09.010 – volume: 329 start-page: 1272 issue: 7477 year: 2004 ident: 10542_CR14 publication-title: BMJ doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7477.1272 – volume: 167 start-page: 1638 issue: 4 year: 2002 ident: 10542_CR25 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65169-5 – volume: 61 start-page: 341 issue: 2 year: 2011 ident: 10542_CR11 publication-title: Eur Urol doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.033 – volume: 116 start-page: 2960 issue: 12 year: 2010 ident: 10542_CR16 publication-title: Cancer doi: 10.1002/cncr.25091 – volume: 190 start-page: 2086 issue: 6 year: 2013 ident: 10542_CR22 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.06.016 – volume: 2011 start-page: 952532 year: 2011 ident: 10542_CR15 publication-title: Adv Urol doi: 10.1155/2011/952532 – volume: 172 start-page: 494 issue: 2 year: 2004 ident: 10542_CR17 publication-title: J Urol doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000131453.52463.8f – volume: 4 start-page: 285 issue: 4 year: 2010 ident: 10542_CR26 publication-title: Curr Opin Support Palliat Care doi: 10.1097/SPC.0b013e32833efcca – volume: 96 start-page: 15 year: 2016 ident: 10542_CR21 publication-title: Urology doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.041 – volume: 47 start-page: 1108 issue: 6 year: 2021 ident: 10542_CR23 publication-title: Int Braz J Urol doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2021.99.14 |
| SSID | ssj0004915 |
| Score | 2.4336133 |
| Snippet | Background
Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local... Penile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local excision is... BackgroundPenile carcinoma is an uncommon cancer that develops in the penis tissue. The standard surgical method to manage regional lymph nodes after local... |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref springer |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 179 |
| SubjectTerms | Abdominal Surgery Carcinoma - surgery Endoscopy Follow-Up Studies Gastroenterology Genital cancers Gynecology Hepatology Humans Inguinal Canal Lymph Node Excision - methods Lymphatic system Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Penile Neoplasms - pathology Penile Neoplasms - surgery Penis Proctology Retrospective Studies Surgery Video-Assisted Surgery - methods |
| SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Springer LINK dbid: RSV link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3dTxQxEJ8IGuOL-IUuoqkJb9Dkrt1uu4-GSHhAYvwgvG3abiuXHF3g7jT89067H5cDNJHXbbu7nc5XO53fAOwUghe59Y6OvcANih97aqQU1GgpLWO6dCat9JE8Planp-WXLils1t9270OSSVMPyW4pCkfRxqDqEDnK8Ro8RHOnYsGGr99OltmQZVu3oOQjypDdulSZu9-xao5u-Zi3r0reiJcmM3Swcb8JPIOnndtJPrZ88hweuPACHn_uAusv4fKoCT9pVNPEI2c0v-nigjSe2CU4OElItPFhrLhFdKiJC3UT01omlkyvkS00KrEYBTi_JpNAOsjWGYlnvQTHoAIiNtYuCs25fgU_Dj593z-kXTUGanMp5tQyq13uZVHoombo2Xgk8Mhx7W2hrNGGo29mbCxI6bwwQrjScWel457LkTB8E9ZDE9wbIEb7OlfWF7hbyWuhDXOutDWPaHJyJHUG435RKttBlceKGdNqAFlOtKyQllWiZaUy2B3GXLRAHf_svd2vddUJ7axiZUJTw7_I4MPQjOIWYyg6uGaBfZRCl1ihTc_gdcsaw-e4LEWMcmagVphm6BChvFdbwuQsQXqPI6pSXrAM9nreWf7X36ex9X_d38IThj5Ze4K0Devzq4V7B4_sr_lkdvU-SdEf5kwZEQ priority: 102 providerName: Springer Nature |
| Title | Long-term follow-up of comparative study of open and endoscopic lymphadenectomy in patients with penile carcinoma |
| URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00464-023-10542-8 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37950029 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2912102236 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2889238847 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC10776462 |
| Volume | 38 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos001101707800002&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVAVX databaseName: Springer LINK customDbUrl: eissn: 1432-2218 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0004915 issn: 0930-2794 databaseCode: RSV dateStart: 19970101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://link.springer.com/search?facet-content-type=%22Journal%22 providerName: Springer Nature |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3db9MwED_BhhAvfH8ExmQk3sCiseM4eUKANvEwqqnA1LfIdmyotDnd2oL233N23FRlYi-8REpsK3HufHe-8_0O4HUpeFkYZ2nuBG5QXO6ollJQraQ0jKna6kjpIzkeV9NpfZwcbot0rHItE6OgbjsTfOTvWB2hrhgv38_PaagaFaKrqYTGTdjNg22M_CwnJ5u8yLqvYFDzEWXIeClpJqbOxZgeRY2FgkgUKBW2FdMVa_Pqocm_IqdRIR3e-9-p3Ie7yRQlH3reeQA3rH8It7-kYPsjOD_q_A8aRDdxyC3db7qak84RswEMJxGdNjwMVbiI8i2xvu1CqsvMkNNLZBWFgi1EBs4uycyTBOO6IMH_S3AMCiViQj0j352px_D98ODbp880VWigppBiSQ0zyhZOlqUqW4bWjsNfPbJcOVNWRivN0V7TJhSptE5oIWxtuTXScsflSGj-BHZ85-0zIFq5tqiMK3EHU7RCaWZtbVoeEObkSKoM8jV5GpPgy0MVjdNmAF6OJG2QpE0kaVNl8GYYM-_BO67tvbcmV5MW8qLZ0CqDV0MzLsEQV1HedivsU1VoJleo5zN42jPJ8DouaxEinxlUW-wzdAjw3tstfvYzwnznAWmpKFkGb9ectvmuf0_j-fXTeAF3GNplvRdpD3aWFyv7Em6ZX8vZ4mI_rp9wncp4rfZh9-PB-HiCd5OvJ38ArrgnoQ |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V3Pb9MwFH4aAwEXfg8CA4wEJ7Bo7ThODgghYNq0ruIwpN6C7dis0uZ0a8vUf4q_kWcnaVUmdtuBa-OkdfP5e-_5-X0P4HUmeJYaZ2nfCQxQXN9RLaWgWklpGFOF1fFND-RwmI9GxbcN-N3VwoRjlR0nRqKuahP2yN-zIkpdMZ59nJzS0DUqZFe7FhoNLPbt4hxDtumHvS_4ft8wtvP18PMubbsKUJNKMaOGGWVTJ7NMZRVDC-0K3utZrpzJcqOV5uhjaBMaK1ontBC2sNwaabnjsic0x-deg-vI4zIEe3IkV3WYRdMxAR9IGQK9LdKJpXoxh0jRQiLxiRRZaN0QXvBuLx7S_CtTGw3gzt3_7a-7B3daV5t8atbGfdiw_gHcPGgPEzyE00Htf9JgmojD1VCf0_mE1I6YlSA6ieq74cPQZYwoXxHrqzqU8owNOV7gUlBI3CHzcbIgY09amdopCfvbBO9B0iUm9Gvy9Yl6BN-vZMJbsOlrb58A0cpVaW5chhFaWgmlmbWFqXhQ0JM9qRLod3AoTSvPHrqEHJdLYekIoRIhVEYIlXkCb5f3TBpxkktHb3fwKFuimpYrbCTwankZKSbkjZS39RzH5DmGATn6MQk8bkC5_DouCxEyuwnka3BdDgjy5etX_Pgoypj3g5JUmrEE3nXIXv2uf0_j6eXTeAm3dg8PBuVgb7j_DG4z9EGbHbNt2Jydze1zuGF-zcbTsxdx7RL4cdWI_wMDoYHr |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V1LbxMxEB6VFFW98H4sFDASnMBqYq_XuweEgDaiaogiBFJvi-21aaTWmzYJVf4av47xPhKFit564Lp-7Hr9eWbs8XwD8CoRPImNs7TnBG5QXM9RLaWgWklpGFOZ1dVMD-RwmB4dZaMN-N3GwoRrla1MrAR1UZpwRr7LsorqivFk1zXXIkZ7_feTMxoySAVPa5tOo4bIoV1c4PZt-u5gD-f6NWP9_W-fPtMmwwA1sRQzaphRNnYySVRSMNTWLuPdruXKmSQ1WmmO9oY2IcmidUILYTPLrZGWOy67QnPs9wZsSjQy4g5sftwfjr6uojKzOn8CdkkZwr4J2akC9yqPIkV9iWJQxCiT1tXiJVv38pXNv_y2lTrs3_6ff-QduNUY4eRDvWruwob192DrS3PN4D6cDUr_kwalRRyuk_KCziekdMSsqNJJxcsbHob8Y0T5glhflCHIZ2zIyQIXiUKRHnwipwsy9qQhsJ2ScPJNsA2KY2JCJidfnqoH8P1aBvwQOr709jEQrVwRp8YluHeLC6E0szYzBQ_cerIrVQS9Fhq5aYjbQ_6Qk3xJOV3BKUc45RWc8jSCN8s2k5q25MraOy1U8kaETfMVTiJ4uSxG4RM8Ssrbco510hQ3CClaOBE8qgG6fB2XmQg-3wjSNeguKwRi8_USPz6uCM57gWMqTlgEb1uUr77r38N4cvUwXsAWAj0fHAwPn8I2Q-O0Pkrbgc7sfG6fwU3zazaenj9vFjKBH9cN-T86nIwL |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Long-term+follow-up+of+comparative+study+of+open+and+endoscopic+lymphadenectomy+in+patients+with+penile+carcinoma&rft.jtitle=Surgical+endoscopy&rft.au=Zhou%2C+Xue-Lu&rft.date=2024-01-01&rft.pub=Springer+US&rft.issn=0930-2794&rft.eissn=1432-2218&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=179&rft.epage=185&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs00464-023-10542-8&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F37950029&rft.externalDocID=PMC10776462 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0930-2794&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0930-2794&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0930-2794&client=summon |