Conservative Management of Vulvar Cancer—Where Should We Draw the Line?

Simple Summary: Vulvar cancer is a rare cancer but has a high cure rate if diagnosed early and treated appropriately. In the early 20th century, 5-year survival rates were only 15–20% because of inadequate treatment of both the primary cancer and the groin lymph nodes. By the mid-20th century, 5-year survival rates rose to 60–70% with the introduction of the radical resection of the vulva, together with the radical resection of the groin and usually pelvic lymph nodes. Although cure rates were good, physical and psychological morbidity were high with this extensive surgery. Hence, various modifications have been proposed over the past 50 years to decrease this morbidity without compromising survival, including modifications to the extent of both the vulvectomy and lymph node dissection. This paper looks at the results these modifications have on both survival and morbidity. Vulvar cancer is a rare disease, and cure rates were low until the mid-20th century. The introduction of an en bloc radical vulvectomy and bilateral groin and pelvic lymph node dissection saw them rise from 15–20% to 60–70%. However, this very radical surgery was associated with high physical and psychological morbidity. Wounds were usually left open to granulate, and the average post-operative hospital stay was about 90 days. Many attempts have been made to decrease morbidity without compromising survival. Modifications that have proven to be successful are as follows: (i) the elimination of routine pelvic node dissection, (ii) the use of separate incisions for groin dissection, (iii) the use of unilateral groin dissection for lateral, unifocal lesions, (iv) and radical local excision with 1 cm surgical margins for unifocal lesions. Sentinel node biopsy with ultrasonic groin surveillance for patients with node-negative disease has been the most recent modification and is advocated for patients whose primary cancer is <4 cm in diameter. Controversy currently exists around the need for 1 cm surgical margins around all primary lesions and on the appropriate ultrasonic surveillance for patients with negative sentinel nodes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]