predicting lymph node metastasis of presumed stage I
and II endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;
1.
日本婦人科腫瘍学会 編:フローチャート ガイドラ
イン総説 初回治療(特殊組織型を含む),子宮体がん
治療ガイドライン2018年版.東京;金原出版,2018;
207: 197. e1-8
13.
Frost JA, Webster KE, Bryant A, Morrison J:
Lymphadenectomy for the management of endometrial
22-113
cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 10:
2.
McMahon CJ, Rofsky NM, Pedrosa I: Lymphatic
metastases from pelvic tumors: anatomic classification,
characterization, and staging.Radiology 2010;254: 31-
CD007585
14.
Bendifallah S, Koskas M, Ballester M, Genin AS,
Darai E, Rouzier R: The survival impact of systematic
46
lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer with the use
3.
国立がん研究センター:がん情報サービス「がん登
of propensity score matching analysis. Am J Obstet
録・統計」(全国がん登録)
https://ganjoho.jp/reg_stat/statistics/dl/index.
html#incidence4pref(最終閲覧日2020年12月24日)
Gynecol 2012; 206: 500. e1-11
15. Lecointre L, Lodi M, Faller É, Boisramé T, Agnus
-24-
類内膜癌Grade 1内膜限局型子宮体癌の孤発再発例
V, Baldauf JJ, et al. : Diagnostic accuracy and clinical
17.
Zahl Eriksson AG, Ducie J, Ali N, McGree ME,
impact of sentinel lymph node sampling in endometrial
Weaver AL, Bogani G, et al. : Comparison of a sentinel
cancer at high risk of recurrence: a meta-analysis. J
lymph node and a selective lymphadenectomy
Clin Med 2020; 9: 3874
algorithm in patients with endometrioid endometrial
16. Rossi EC, Kowalski LD, Scalici J, Cantrell L, Schuler K,
carcinoma and limited myometrial invasion. Gynecol
Hanna RK, et al. : A comparison of sentinel lymph node
Oncol 2016; 140: 394-399
biopsy to lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer
18.
Milam MR, Java J, Walker JL, Metzinger DS, Parker
staging (FIRES trial): a multicentre, prospective,
LP, Coleman RL: Nodal metastasis risk in endometrioid
cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 384-392
endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119: 286-292
-25-
Yamagata Med J(ISSN 0288-030X)2022;40
伊藤,小島原,髙橋,福長,手塚
(1)
:21-26
DOI 10.15022/00005303
Endometrioid carcinoma grade 1 with endometrial localization
and solitary recurrence in the para-aortic lymph node
3.5 years after surgery: A case report
Yasufumi Ito*,**, Takanobu Kojimahara*, Kanako Takahashi*,
Takeshi Fukunaga*, Naohiro Tezuka*
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Okitama General Hospital
**
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yamagata University Faculty of Medicine
ABSTRACT
Cases of uterine body cancer are increasing every year, with more than half of the cases being
those of stage I cancer. Lymph node dissection may be omitted in some cases, especially in patients
with stage IA cancer, who are presumed to be at low risk for recurrence. Herein, we report the case
of a 60-year-old woman who presented with the chief complaint of irregular genital bleeding and was
diagnosed with grade 1 endometrial carcinoma(uterine cancer with <50% myometrial invasion)
The initial surgery was performed without lymph node dissection. As the patient was in the lowrisk group for recurrence, no postoperative adjuvant therapy was administered. However, 3.5 years
postoperatively, she experienced a solitary recurrence in a paraaortic lymph node and underwent
nodal excision. The patient completed docetaxel and cyclophosphamide therapy and has remained
recurrence-free for 2.5 years. According to the literature, the estimated recurrence rate of grade 1
endometrial carcinoma is approximately 1%. The decision to perform lymph node dissection in such
cases should be based not only on therapeutic value but also on the risk of adverse events. This case
serves as a reminder that the recurrence rate is not zero even in the low-risk group.
Keywords: endometrial cancer, solitary recurrence in the para-aortic lymph node, risk for recurrence,
lymph node dissection
-26-
...