Table 1.
Characteristics of 10 Patients With Isolated Paraaortic Metastasis
| Paraaortic Lymph Nodes |
No. of Total Nodes Positive |
No. of Pelvic Nodes | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pt | Age at Surgery,y |
Histologic Type |
FIGO Grade |
MI, % |
Tumor Diameter, mm |
Cervical Invasion |
LVSI | Peritoneal Washing |
No. Removed |
No. Positivea |
Above IMA |
Below IMA |
Removed (All Negative) and Ultrastaged |
Positive After Ultrastaging |
Largest Metastasis |
| 1 | 66 | Endo | 2 | 90 | 50 | No | Yes | Pos | 11 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 32 | 4 | MMt |
| 2 | 79 | Ser | 3 | 0 | 40 | No | No | Pos | 25 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 21 | 0 | … |
| 3 | 50 | Endo | 2 | 75 | 30 | No | Yes | Pos | 33 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 18 | lb | MMt |
| 4 | 78 | Endo | 3 | 53 | 10 | No | Yes | Neg | 10 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 38 | 0 | … |
| 5 | 57 | Endo | 3 | 69 | 28 | No | Yes | Pos | 27 | 3 | Unk | Unk | 50 | 0 | … |
| 6 | 60 | Endo | 3 | 88 | 45 | No | No | Neg | 11 | 1 | Unk | Unk | 23 | 0 | … |
| 7 | 65 | Endo | 2 | 25 | 30 | No | No | Neg | 24 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 36 | 0 | … |
| 8 | 75 | Endo | 2 | 60 | 60 | No | Yes | Neg | 14 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 44 | 0 | … |
| 9 | 64 | Ser | 3 | 22 | 68 | No | No | Pos | 27 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 32 | 0 | … |
| 10 | 55 | Endo | 2 | 55 | 50 | No | No | Neg | 9 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 2 | ITC |
Abbreviations: Endo, endometrioid; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; IMA, inferior mesenteric artery; ITC, isolated tumor cells; LVSI, lymphovascular space invasion; MI, myometrial invasion; MMt, micrometastasis; Neg, negative; Pos, positive; Pt, patient; Ser, serous; Unk, unknown.
a
All positive paraaortic lymph nodes were macrometastasis.
b
Ultrastaging was not performed because MMt was identified by reviewing the diagnostic hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides before ultrastaging.