Article Data

  • Views 740
  • Dowloads 176


Open Access Special Issue

Management of nodal disease in advanced-stage ovarian cancer: porta hepatis, celiac, pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy

  • Cagatay Taskiran1,*,
  • Burak Giray1
  • Dogan Vatansever1
  • Orhan Bilge2

1Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Koc University School of Medicine, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey

2Department of General Surgery, Koc University School of Medicine, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey

DOI: 10.22514/ejgo.2022.009 Vol.43,Issue 3,June 2022 pp.36-45

Submitted: 08 February 2022 Accepted: 18 April 2022

Published: 15 June 2022

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Radical Surgery in Ovarian Cancer)

*Corresponding Author(s): Cagatay Taskiran E-mail:


Maximal cytoreduction is considered the most important prognostic factor for ovarian cancer survival. Most ovarian cancer patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage, and more than half of them have upper abdominal involvement. Upper abdominal regions alongside the pelvis should be evaluated systematically as a routine procedure during cytoreductive surgery. Therefore, aggressive procedures are adopted during cytoreductive surgery, including upper abdominal regions, to achieve maximal cytoreduction. It should include the exploration of porta hepatis and celiac lymph nodes. The feasibility of metastatic disease resection at the porta hepatis and celiac lymph nodes has been demonstrated in many studies with acceptable morbidity. Furthermore, ovarian cancer often leads to retroperitoneal lymph nodes metastases in patients with advanced stages of the disease. Data from the literature showed that more than half of the advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients had lymph node involvement. In this manuscript, we reviewed the current literature and aimed to investigate the impact on survival of surgical resection of porta hepatis, celiac regions, and pelvic/paraaortic lymph nodes in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. Resection of metastatic disease at the porta hepatis/celiac lymph nodes to achieve maximal cytoreduction is feasible but with a relatively high rate of morbidity and mortality. Randomized controlled trials indicate that in the absence of suspicious lymph nodes, both during surgery and at imaging, systematic lymphadenectomy seems to provide no survival benefit.


Celiac lymph node; Isolated lymph node metastasis; Lymphadenectomy; Ovarian cancer; Porta hepatis

Cite and Share

Cagatay Taskiran,Burak Giray,Dogan Vatansever,Orhan Bilge. Management of nodal disease in advanced-stage ovarian cancer: porta hepatis, celiac, pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2022. 43(3);36-45.


[1] Eoh KJ, Yoon JW, Lee I, Lee J, Kim S, Kim SW, et al. The efficacy of systematic lymph node dissection in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer during interval debulking surgery performed after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2017; 116: 329–336.

[2] Bund V, Lecointre L, Velten M, Ouldamer L, Bendifallah S, Koskas M, et al. Impact of lymphadenectomy on survival of patients with serous advanced ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a French national multicenter study (FRANCOGYN). Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9: 2427.

[3] Aletti GD, Dowdy SC, Gostout BS, Jones MB, Stanhope CR, Wilson TO, et al. Aggressive Surgical Effort and Improved Survival in Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2006; 107: 77–85.

[4] du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E, Harter P, Ray-Coquard I, Pfisterer J. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsge-meinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO‐OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer. 2009; 115: 1234–1244.

[5] Harter P, Sehouli J, Vergote I, Ferron G, Reuss A, Meier W, et al. Randomized Trial of Cytoreductive Surgery for Relapsed Ovarian Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2021; 385: 2123–2131.

[6] Eisenkop SM, Spirtos NM, Friedman RL, Lin WM, Pisani AL, Perticucci S. Relative influences of tumor volume before surgery and the cytoreductive outcome on survival for patients with advanced ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecologic Oncology. 2003; 90: 390–396.

[7] Chi DS, Franklin CC, Levine DA, Akselrod F, Sabbatini P, Jarnagin WR, et al. Improved optimal cytoreduction rates for stages IIIC and IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer: a change in surgical approach. Gynecologic Oncology. 2004; 94: 650–654.

[8] Son J, Chang S. Cholecystectomy, porta hepatis stripping, and omental bursectomy. Gland Surgery. 2021; 10: 1230–1234.

[9] Eoh KJ, Lee J, Yoon JW, Ji Nam E, Kim S, Kim S, et al. Role of systematic lymphadenectomy as part of primary debulking surgery for optimally cytoreduced advanced ovarian cancer: Reappraisal in the era of radical surgery. Oncotarget. 2017; 8: 37807–37816.

[10] Chiyoda T, Sakurai M, Satoh T, et al. Lymphadenectomy for primary ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2020; 31: e67.

[11] Cheng A, Lang J. Survival analysis of lymph node resection in ovarian cancer: a population-based study. Frontiers in Oncology. 2020; 10: 355.

[12] Harter P, Sehouli J, Lorusso D, Reuss A, Vergote I, Marth C, et al. A Randomized Trial of Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Advanced Ovarian Neoplasms. New England Journal of Medicine. 2019; 380: 822–832.

[13] Son J, Chang S, Ryu H. Porta hepatis debulking procedures as part of primary cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2017; 146: 672–673.

[14] Di Donato V, Giannini A, D’Oria O, Schiavi MC, Di Pinto A, Fischetti M, et al. Hepatobiliary Disease Resection in Patients with Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Prognostic Role and Optimal Cytoreduction. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2021; 28: 222–230.

[15] Raspagliesi F, Ditto A, Martinelli F, Haeusler E, Lorusso D. Advanced ovarian cancer: Omental bursa, lesser omentum, celiac, portal and triad nodes spread as cause of inaccurate evaluation of residual tumor. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 129: 92–96.

[16] Song YJ, Lim MC, Kang S, Seo S, Kim SH, Han S, et al. Extended cytoreduction of tumor at the porta hepatis by an interdisciplinary team approach in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011; 121: 253–257.

[17] Martinez A, Pomel C, Mery E, Querleu D, Gladieff L, Ferron G. Celiac lymph node resection and porta hepatis disease resection in advanced or recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2011; 121: 258–263.

[18] Tozzi R, Traill Z, Garruto Campanile R, Ferrari F, Soleymani Majd H, Nieuwstad J, et al. Porta hepatis peritonectomy and hepato–celiac lymphadenectomy in patients with stage IIIC–IV ovarian cancer: Diagnostic pathway, surgical technique and outcomes. Gynecologic Oncology. 2016; 143: 35–39.

[19] Gallotta V, Ferrandina G, Vizzielli G, Conte C, Lucidi A, Costantini B, et al. Hepatoceliac Lymph Node Involvement in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients: Prognostic Role and Clinical Considerations. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2017; 24: 3413–3421.

[20] Angeles MA, Ferron G, Cabarrou B, Balague G, Martínez-Gómez C, Gladieff L, et al. Prognostic impact of celiac lymph node involvement in patients after frontline treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. European Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2019; 45: 1410–1416.

[21] Bakır MS, Birge Ö, Karadag C, Doğan S, Tuncer HA, Simsek T. The insolvable problem; survival effect of lymphadenectomy in advanced stage ovarian cancer. Ginekologia Polska. 2021; 92: 829–836.

[22] Zhou J, Zhang W, Zhang Q, He Z, Sun J, Chen Q, et al. The effect of lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer according to residual tumor status: a population-based study. International Journal of Surgery. 2018; 52: 11–15.

[23] Lopes A, Genta ML, da Costa Miranda V, Aranha A, Lopez RVM, Piato DSAM, et al. Role of systematic pelvic and para‐aortic lymphadenectomy in delayed debulking surgery after six neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles for high‐grade serous ovarian carcinoma. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research. 2021; 47: 2737–2744.

[24] Xu D, Xue J, Rozan R, Li L. The role systematic lymphadenectomy plays in determining the survival outcome for advanced ovarian cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Annals of Palliative Medicine. 2020; 9: 912–920.

[25] Wang Y, Ren F, Song Z, Wang X, Zhang C, Ouyang L. Prognostic significance of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Oncology. 2020; 10: 86.

[26] Lin Q, Liu W, Xu S, Li J, Tong J. The value of systematic lymphadenectomy during debulking surgery in the treatment of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Ovarian Research. 2020; 13: 56.

[27] Song N, Gao Y. Therapeutic value of selective lymphadenectomy in interval debulking surgery for stage IIIc and IV epithelial ovarian cancer. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer. 2019; 29: 761–767.

[28] Ferrero A, Ditto A, Giorda G, Gadducci A, Greggi S, Daniele A, et al. Secondary cytoreductive surgery for isolated lymph node recurrence of epithelial ovarian cancer: a multicenter study. European Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2014; 40: 891–898.

[29] Hollis RL, Carmichael J, Meynert AM, Churchman M, Hallas-Potts A, Rye T, et al. Clinical and molecular characterization of ovarian carcinoma displaying isolated lymph node relapse. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019; 221: 245.e1–245.e15.

[30] Levy T, Migdan Z, Aleohin N, Ben-Shem, Peled O, Tal O, et al. Retroperitoneal lymph node recurrence of epithelial ovarian cancer: Prognostic factors and treatment outcome. Gynecologic Oncology. 2020; 157: 392–397.

[31] Seidler S, Koual M, Achen G, Bentivegna E, Fournier L, Delanoy N, et al. Clinical Impact of Lymphadenectomy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Review of Available Data. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021; 10: 334.

[32] AlMahdy AM, Elassall GM, Abdelbadee AY, Abd-Elkariem AY, Atef F, Ahmed IA, et al. Prognostic value of systematic lymphadenectomy in patients with ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology. 2021; 267: 179–185.

[33] Simon V, Ngo C, Pujade-Lauraine E, Ferron G, Pomel C, Leblanc E, et al. Should we Abandon Systematic Pelvic and Paraaortic Lymphadenectomy in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer? Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2020; 27: 3882–3890.

[34] Vatansever D, Taskiran C, Mutlu Meydanli M, Gungorduk K, Akbayir O, Yalcin I, et al. Impact of cytoreductive surgery on survival of patients with low‐grade serous ovarian carcinoma: a multicentric study of Turkish Society of Gynecologic Oncology (TRSGO‐OvCa‐001). Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2021; 123: 1801–1810.

[35] Nasioudis D, Latif NA, Haggerty AF, Giuntoli II RL, Kim SH, Ko EM. Outcomes of comprehensive lymphadenectomy for patients with advanced stage ovarian carcinoma and rare histologic sub-types. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer. 2021; 31: 1132–1136.

[36] Kajiyama H, Suzuki S, Yoshikawa N, Tamauchi S, Shibata K, Kikkawa F. The impact of systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy on long-term oncologic outcome of women with advanced ovarian clear-cell carcinoma. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2020; 31: e47.

[37] Delangle R, Rossard L, Cirier J, Delvallée J, Bendifallah S, Touboul C, et al. Isolated lymph node recurrence in epithelial ovarian cancer: Recurrence with better prognosis? European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2020; 249: 64–69.

[38] Blanchard P, Plantade A, Pagès C, Afchain P, Louvet C, Tournigand C, et al. Isolated lymph node relapse of epithelial ovarian carcinoma: Outcomes and prognostic factors. Gynecologic Oncology. 2007; 104: 41–45.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time