Comparison of different surgical methods and strategies for inguinal lymph node dissection in patients with penile cancer

To compare the clinical feasibility and oncological outcome of different surgical techniques for inguinal lymphadenectomy (ILND) in patients suffering from penile cancer. This study included data from 109 cN0–2 patients diagnosed with penile cancer who received ILND. 80 laparoscopic ILND were performed on 40 patients, while 138 open surgeries were performed on 69 patients. Perioperative complications and prognosis were compared between different surgical techniques. Compared with the open surgery group, the laparoscopy group had a shorter hospital stay (8.88 ± 7.86 days vs. 13.94 ± 10.09 days, P = 0.004), and a lower wound healing delay rate (8.75% vs. 22.46%, P = 0.017), but also had longer drainage time (10.91 ± 9.66 vs. 8.70 ± 4.62, P = 0.002). There were no significant differences in terms of other intraoperative parameters, complications, and survival between open and laparoscopic group. Compared with saphenous vein ligated subgroup, preserved subgroup showed no significant reducing of complication rate. There was no significant difference among complication between different open surgery subgroup. Immediate ILND showed no prognostic advantage over delayed ILND regardless of clinical lymph node status. Compared with open surgery, the minimally invasive ILND technique has similar oncological efficiency and a lower complication rate. Saphenous vein preservation has limited value in reducing complications. Delayed lymphadenectomy might be a more reasonable option for ILND.