阴茎癌腹股沟淋巴结转移的诊断:现状与进展
Diagnosis of Inguinal Lymph Node Metastasis in Penile Cancer: Current Status and Progress
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2026.1631117, PDF,   
作者: 郭烨鹏, 李再尚*:暨南大学第二临床医学院(深圳市人民医院)泌尿外科,广东 深圳;唐瑜梦:暨南大学第二临床医学院(深圳市人民医院)肾内科,广东 深圳
关键词: 阴茎癌腹股沟淋巴结转移精准诊断Penile Cancer Inguinal Lymph Node Metastasis Accurate Diagnosis
摘要: 阴茎癌虽相对罕见但侵袭性强,腹股沟淋巴结转移是其最主要的转移途径与独立预后因素。准确判断淋巴结状态直接影响分期决策、治疗策略及生存结局。本文系统综述阴茎癌腹股沟淋巴结转移的诊断现状与技术进展,聚焦从初筛至确诊的多层级评估体系。临床触诊作为基础筛查手段,简便易行但对微转移漏诊率高;影像学检查已形成分层评估路径:超声凭借高分辨率成为首选筛查工具,CT与PET-CT在全身分期及远处转移排查中发挥核心作用,MRI则以优异软组织显像能力在微小结构评估中独具价值。在病理确诊层面,超声引导细针穿刺活检有效衔接影像与病理诊断,动态前哨淋巴结活检已成为临床淋巴结阴性患者的标准分期术式,在保障诊断准确性的同时显著降低手术并发症。分子生物学检测正逐步从辅助工具向风险分层补充手段演进,p53、p16INK4a、PD-L1等标志物及流式细胞术、二代测序等技术在微灶检测与疑难病例鉴别中展现出潜力。当前,“无创筛查–精准影像–病理确诊–分子补充”的阶梯式协同诊断模式已基本形成,但仍面临微小转移灶检出敏感度不足、动态前哨淋巴结活检假阴性率波动、分子检测缺乏标准化及资源分布不均等挑战。未来,推动多模态技术融合、人工智能辅助判读、液体活检联合应用及低成本适宜技术研发,将成为实现阴茎癌腹股沟淋巴结“精准化、微创化、个体化”诊断的重要方向。
Abstract: Although penile carcinoma is relatively rare, it is highly invasive, and inguinal lymph node metastasis is the most important metastasis route and an independent prognostic factor. Accurate judgment of lymph node status directly affects staging decision, treatment strategy and survival outcome. This paper systematically reviews the diagnosis status and technical progress of inguinal lymph node metastasis of penile cancer, focusing on the multi-level evaluation system from primary screening to diagnosis. As a basic screening method, clinical palpation is simple and easy, but the missed diagnosis rate of micrometastasis is high. Imaging examination has formed a hierarchical evaluation path: ultrasound has become the first choice screening tool because of its high resolution, CT and PET-CT play a core role in the whole body staging and distant metastasis investigation, and MRI has unique value in the evaluation of micro-structures because of its excellent soft tissue imaging ability. At the level of pathological diagnosis, ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy effectively connects the image with pathological diagnosis, and dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy has become the standard staging operation for patients with negative lymph nodes, which can ensure the accuracy of diagnosis and significantly reduce surgical complications. Molecular biological detection is gradually evolving from an auxiliary tool to a risk stratification supplementary means. Markers such as p53, p16INK4a and PD-L1, as well as technologies such as flow cytometry and second-generation sequencing, have shown potential in micro-focus detection and difficult case identification. At present, the step-by-step collaborative diagnosis model of “non-invasive screening-accurate imaging-pathological diagnosis-molecular supplement” has basically taken shape, but it still faces challenges such as insufficient sensitivity in detecting micrometastases, fluctuation of false negative rate of dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy, lack of standardization of molecular detection and uneven distribution of resources. In the future, promoting the integration of multimodal technology, artificial intelligence-assisted interpretation, combined application of liquid biopsy and low-cost research and development of appropriate technologies will become an important direction to realize the “accurate, minimally invasive and individualized” diagnosis of inguinal lymph nodes in penile cancer.
文章引用:郭烨鹏, 唐瑜梦, 李再尚. 阴茎癌腹股沟淋巴结转移的诊断:现状与进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2026, 16(3): 3116-3126. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2026.1631117

参考文献

[1] Jeanne-Julien, A., Bouchot, O., De Vergie, S., Branchereau, J., Perrouin-Verbe, M. and Rigaud, J. (2023) Long-Term Oncological Results in Penile Cancer Treated by Inguinal Lymphadenectomy. World Journal of Urology, 41, 1589-1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] Fallara, G., Pozzi, E., Onur Cakir, O., Tandogdu, Z., Castiglione, F., Salonia, A., et al. (2023) Diagnostic Accuracy of Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European Urology Focus, 9, 500-512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Perdonà, S., Izzo, A., Tufano, A., Passaro, F., Quarto, G., Aveta, A., et al. (2025) Advancing Surgical Management of Penile Cancer: Single Port Bilateral Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection. International Brazilian Journal of Urology, 51, e20240663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Brassetti, A., Bove, A.M., Proietti, F., Anceschi, U., Bologna, E., Cartolano, S., et al. (2025) Single-Port Antegrade Robotic Lymphadenectomy: A Novel Minimally Invasive Approach to Treat Lymph Nodes in Men with Penile Cancer. European Urology, 88, 381-387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Sachdeva, A., McGuinness, L., Zapala, Ł., Greco, I., Garcia-Perdomo, H.A., Kailavasan, M., et al. (2024) Management of Lymph Node-Positive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review. European Urology, 85, 257-273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Moen, C.A., Nordanger, I.M., Karlsdóttir, Á., Honoré, A., Juliebø‐Jones, P., Blomberg, S.M., et al. (2025) Penile Cancer Distant Metastasis or Primary Lung Cancer? Using Focused Genomic Profiling of Tumor and Germline Mutations with Next‐Generation Sequencing for Clinical Decision‐Making. Cancer Reports, 8, e70278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Pandolfo, S.D., Biasatti, A., Parnham, A., Autorino, R. and Brouwer, O.R. (2025) Current Role of Robotic Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Penile Cancer. European Urology Focus, 11, 43-45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Greco, I., Fernandez-Pello, S., Sakalis, V.I., Barreto, L., Albersen, M., Ayres, B., et al. (2024) Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Minimally Invasive Procedures for Surgical Inguinal Nodal Staging in Penile Carcinoma. European Urology Focus, 10, 567-580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] Machado, R.D., Faria, E.F., Júnior, A.A.R., Stirpari, F., Feres, R.N., Spiess, P.E., et al. (2025) Is Body Mass Index a Risk Factor for Lymphnode Metastasis in Penile Cancer? BMC Cancer, 25, Article No. 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Sievert, K.-D., Dräger, D.-L., Köhn, F.-M., et al. (2018) Peniskarzinom: Diagnose und Staging. Der Urologe, 57, 418-422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Vreeburg, M.T.A., Vaessen, G.M., de Vries, H.M., Heeres, B.C., van Dijk‐de Haan, M.C., van der Noort, V., et al. (2025) Evaluating Follow‐Up in Patients with Lymph Node‐Negative Penile Cancer at a High‐Volume Centre. BJU International, 136, 675-681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Graafland, N.M., Teertstra, H.J., Besnard, A.P.E., van Boven, H.H. and Horenblas, S. (2011) Identification of High Risk Pathological Node Positive Penile Carcinoma: Value of Preoperative Computerized Tomography Imaging. Journal of Urology, 185, 881-887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Galgano, S.J., Norton, J.C., Porter, K.K., West, J.T. and Rais-Bahrami, S. (2022) Imaging for the Initial Staging and Post-Treatment Surveillance of Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Diagnostics, 12, Article No. 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] Jakobsen, J.K., Frahm Nielsen, T., Ipsen, P., Albrecht‐Beste, E., Cardoso Costa, J., Alslev, L., et al. (2020) Dapeca‐7: Comparative Assessment of Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (CT) and Conventional Diagnostic CT in Diagnosis of Lymph Node Metastases, Distant Metastases and Incidental Findings in Patients with Invasive Penile Cancer. BJU International, 127, 254-262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Leijte, J.A.P., Graafland, N.M., Valdés Olmos, R.A., Van Boven, H.H., Hoefnagel, C.A. and Horenblas, S. (2009) Prospective Evaluation of Hybrid 18F‐Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Staging Clinically Node‐Negative Patients with Penile Carcinoma. BJU International, 104, 640-644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Ottenhof, S.R., Djajadiningrat, R.S., Versleijen, M.W.J., Donswijk, M.L., van der Noort, V., Brouwer, O.R., et al. (2022) F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography with Computed Tomography Has High Diagnostic Value for Pelvic and Distant Staging in Patients with High-Risk Penile Carcinoma. European Urology Focus, 8, 98-104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Salazar, A., Júnior, E.P., Salles, P.G.O., Silva-Filho, R., Reis, E.A. and Mamede, M. (2018) 18F-FDG PET/CT as a Prognostic Factor in Penile Cancer. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 46, 855-863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Jakobsen, J.K., Alslev, L., Ipsen, P., Costa, J.C., Krarup, K.P., Sommer, P., et al. (2015) Dapeca‐3: Promising Results of Sentinel Node Biopsy Combined with 18F‐Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Clinically Lymph Node‐Negative Patients with Penile Cancer—A National Study from Denmark. BJU International, 118, 102-111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Sadeghi, R., Gholami, H., Zakavi, S.R., Kakhki, V.R.D. and Horenblas, S. (2012) Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for Diagnosing Inguinal Lymph Node Involvement in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature. Clinical Nuclear Medicine, 37, 436-441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Dräger, D.L., Heuschkel, M., Protzel, C., et al (2018) [18F]FDG PET/CT for Assessing Inguinal Lymph Nodes in Patients with Penile Cancer—Correlation with Histopathology after Inguinal Lymphadenectomy.
[21] Wever, L., de Vries, H., van der Poel, H., van Leeuwen, F., Horenblas, S. and Brouwer, O. (2022) Minimally Invasive Evaluation of the Clinically Negative Inguinal Node in Penile Cancer: Dynamic Sentinel Node Biopsy. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 40, 209-214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Bloom, J.B., Stern, M., Patel, N.H., Zhang, M. and Phillips, J.L. (2018) Detection of Lymph Node Metastases in Penile Cancer. Translational Andrology and Urology, 7, 879-886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Tabatabaei, S., Harisinghani, M. and McDougal, W.S. (2005) Regional Lymph Node Staging Using Lymphotropic Nanoparticle Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Ferumoxtran-10 in Patients with Penile Cancer. Journal of Urology, 174, 923-927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[24] Barua, S.K., Kaman, P.K., Baruah, S.J., T.P., R., Bagchi, P.K., Sarma, D., et al. (2018) Role of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DWMRI) in Assessment of Primary Penile Tumor Characteristics and Its Correlations with Inguinal Lymph Node Metastasis: A Prospective Study. World Journal of Oncology, 9, 145-150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Kumar, V., Kumar, P.R., Juette, A., Pawaroo, D., Ball, R.Y. and Sethia, K.K. (2023) Improved Outcome in Penile Cancer with Radiologically Enhanced Stratification Protocol for Lymph Node Staging Procedures: A Study in 316 Inguinal Basins with a Mean Follow-Up of 5 Years. BMC Urology, 23, Article No. 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] O’Shea, A., Kilcoyne, A., Hedgire, S.S. and Harisinghani, M.G. (2019) Pelvic Lymph Nodes and Pathways of Disease Spread in Male Pelvic Malignancies. Abdominal Radiology, 45, 2198-2212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[27] Kochhar, R., Taylor, B. and Sangar, V. (2009) Imaging in Primary Penile Cancer: Current Status and Future Directions. European Radiology, 20, 36-47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Mueller-Lisse, U.G., Scher, B., Scherr, M.K. and Seitz, M. (2008) Functional Imaging in Penile Cancer: PET/Computed Tomography, MRI, and Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy. Current Opinion in Urology, 18, 105-110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] Lee, E.W.C., Issa, A., Oliveira, P., Lau, M., Sangar, V., Parnham, A., et al. (2022) High Diagnostic Accuracy of Inguinal Ultrasonography and Fine‐Needle Aspiration Followed by Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Men with Impalpable and Palpable Inguinal Lymph Nodes. BJU International, 130, 331-336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[30] Heyns, C.F., Fleshner, N., Sangar, V., Schlenker, B., Yuvaraja, T.B. and van Poppel, H. (2010) Management of the Lymph Nodes in Penile Cancer. Urology, 76, S43-S57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[31] Kroon, B.K., Horenblas, S., Deurloo, E.E., Nieweg, O.E. and Teertstra, H.J. (2005) Ultrasonography‐Guided Fine‐Needle Aspiration Cytology before Sentinel Node Biopsy in Patients with Penile Carcinoma. BJU International, 95, 517-521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[32] Zou, Z., Liu, Z., Tang, L., Wang, Y., Liang, J., Zhang, R., et al. (2016) Radiocolloid-Based Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Penile Cancer with Clinically Negative Inguinal Lymph Node: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Urology and Nephrology, 48, 2001-2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[33] Graafland, N.M., Lam, W., Leijte, J.A.P., Yap, T., Gallee, M.P.W., Corbishley, C., et al. (2010) Prognostic Factors for Occult Inguinal Lymph Node Involvement in Penile Carcinoma and Assessment of the High-Risk EAU Subgroup: A Two-Institution Analysis of 342 Clinically Node-Negative Patients. European Urology, 58, 742-747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[34] Fankhauser, C.D., de Vries, H.M., Roussel, E., Jakobsen, J.K., Issa, A., Lee, E.W.C., et al. (2022) Lymphovascular and Perineural Invasion Are Risk Factors for Inguinal Lymph Node Metastases in Men with T1G2 Penile Cancer. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, 148, 2231-2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[35] Nerli, R.B., Sharma, M., Patel, P., Ghagane, S.C., Patil, S.D., Gupta, P., et al. (2021) Modified Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection in Groin-Negative Patients of Penile Cancer: Our Experience. Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology, 12, 229-234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[36] Vreeburg, M.T.A., Donswijk, M.L., Albersen, M., Parnham, A., Ayres, B., Protzel, C., et al. (2024) New EAU/ASCO Guideline Recommendations on Sentinel Node Biopsy for Penile Cancer and Remaining Challenges from a Nuclear Medicine Perspective. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 51, 2861-2868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[37] Gebruers, J., Elst, L., Baldewijns, M., De Wever, L., Van Laere, K., Albersen, M., et al. (2023) Accuracy of Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Inguinal Lymph Node Staging in cN0 Penile Cancer. EJNMMI Research, 13, Article No. 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[38] Yeung, L.L. and Brandes, S.B. (2013) Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy as the New Paradigm for the Management of Penile Cancer. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 31, 693-696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[39] Omorphos, S., Saad, Z., Arya, M., Freeman, A., Malone, P., Nigam, R., et al. (2015) Feasibility of Performing Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy as a Delayed Procedure in Penile Cancer. World Journal of Urology, 34, 329-335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[40] O'Brien, J.S., Teh, J., Kelly, B.D., Chen, K., Manning, T., Furrer, M., et al. (2022) Interrogating the Impassable: A Case Series and Literature Review of Unilateral SPECT-CT Groin Visualization in Men with Penile Cancer. Frontiers in Surgery, 9, Article ID: 882011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[41] Lau, W., Lim, I.C.Z.Y., Wong, J.C.S., Ali, S.Z., Kannivelu, A., Lee, J.C.B., et al. (2024) The Surgical Technique and Protocol for Dynamic Sentinel Node Biopsy for Penile Cancer at a Southeast Asian Regional Hospital. Translational Andrology and Urology, 13, 1268-1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[42] Nemitz, L., Vincke, A., Michalik, B., Engels, S., Meyer, L., Henke, R., et al. (2022) Radioisotope-Guided Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Penile Cancer: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study. Frontiers in Oncology, 12, Article ID: 850905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[43] Regent, B., Nowak, K., Skrobisz, K., Matuszewski, M. and Studniarek, M. (2025) MRI of the Scrotum and Penis: Current Applications and Clinical Relevance. Diagnostics, 15, Article No. 3134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[44] Cicchetti, R., Amparore, D., Tamborino, F., Tătaru, O.S., Ferro, M., Digiacomo, A., et al. (2025) The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Urologic Oncology: Current Insights and Challenges. Research and Reports in Urology, 17, 293-308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[45] Hrudka, J., Prouzová, Z., Kendall Bártů, M., Hojný, J., Čapka, D., Zavillová, N., et al. (2023) Immune Cell Infiltration, Tumour Budding, and the p53 Expression Pattern Are Important Predictors in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study of 152 Cases. Pathology, 55, 637-649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[46] Steinestel, J., Al Ghazal, A., Arndt, A., Schnoeller, T.J., Schrader, A.J., Moeller, P., et al. (2015) The Role of Histologic Subtype, p16INK4a Expression, and Presence of Human Papillomavirus DNA in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma. BMC Cancer, 15, Article No. 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[47] Peyroteo, I., Santos, F., Marialva, C. and Brito Ramos, R. (2024) Programmed Death-Ligand Expression and Lymph Node Involvement in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[48] Zhang, L., Hu, J., Ali Zirakzadeh, A., Rosvall, J., Hedlund, M., Hu, P.S., et al. (2018) Detection of Micro-Metastases by Flow Cytometry in Lymph Nodes from Patients with Penile Cancer. BMC Urology, 18, Article No. 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[49] Moen, C.A. and Jakobsen, J.K. (2025) Sentinel Node Mapping in Penile Cancer: An Update on Methods and Pitfalls. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[50] Patel, K.R., Moon, S.C., Shumaker, L.A., Patel, S., Galgano, S.J., Ferguson, J.E., et al. (2025) Utility of Tumor-Informed Circulating Tumor DNA for Monitoring Treatment Response in Nonmetastatic, Locally Advanced Penile and Primary Urethral Cancers. JCO Precision Oncology, 9, e2500045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[51] Kao, C.-C., Xu, T., Yang, Y.-N., Tsai, Y., Liu, S., Wu, S., et al. (2022) Detection of Circulating Tumor Cells as Therapeutic Markers in Patients with Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Preliminary Study. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, 85, 95-101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]