Chao-qian Liu1, Yan Guo, Jun-yi Shi, Yuan Sheng. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, No. 168 Changhai Road, Shanghai 200433, China.
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the relationship between late morbidity (i.e. > or =6 months) and a tumour-negative sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in primary breast cancer patients by using a systematic review approach, and to identify the predictors of late morbidity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature for studies concerning the late morbidity of patients who had undergone SLNB alone or SLNB followed by ALND when SLN metastases were found. A literature search over the last 16 years (1993-2008) was performed in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed according to a list of predefined criteria. The data of assessment and predictors of late morbidity were collected. RESULTS: We identified a total of 32 papers reporting 27 independent cohort studies, of which 17 were high quality studies and were further analysed in this review. There was a great variation in the prevalence of pain (7.5-36%), impairment of range of motion (0.0-31.0%), oedema (0.0-14.0%), decreased strength (11.0-19.0%) and sensory disorders (1.0-66.0%). Factors such as time after surgery and young age were strong predictors of late morbidity. Breast surgery, radiation to axilla, tumour location, body mass index (BMI) and two-step procedure, especially lymph mapping techniques, could also predict the late morbidity to different extents. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB-associated late morbidity, even with a low prevalence, remains a clinical problem which cannot be neglected in primary breast cancer patients. Time after surgery and young age are the important predictors for late morbidity in primary breast cancer patients after SLNB; breast surgery, radiation to axilla, tumour location, BMI and two-step procedure also have limited prognostic value.
AIMS: To evaluate the relationship between late morbidity (i.e. > or =6 months) and a tumour-negative sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in primary breast cancerpatients by using a systematic review approach, and to identify the predictors of late morbidity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature for studies concerning the late morbidity of patients who had undergone SLNB alone or SLNB followed by ALND when SLN metastases were found. A literature search over the last 16 years (1993-2008) was performed in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed according to a list of predefined criteria. The data of assessment and predictors of late morbidity were collected. RESULTS: We identified a total of 32 papers reporting 27 independent cohort studies, of which 17 were high quality studies and were further analysed in this review. There was a great variation in the prevalence of pain (7.5-36%), impairment of range of motion (0.0-31.0%), oedema (0.0-14.0%), decreased strength (11.0-19.0%) and sensory disorders (1.0-66.0%). Factors such as time after surgery and young age were strong predictors of late morbidity. Breast surgery, radiation to axilla, tumour location, body mass index (BMI) and two-step procedure, especially lymph mapping techniques, could also predict the late morbidity to different extents. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB-associated late morbidity, even with a low prevalence, remains a clinical problem which cannot be neglected in primary breast cancerpatients. Time after surgery and young age are the important predictors for late morbidity in primary breast cancerpatients after SLNB; breast surgery, radiation to axilla, tumour location, BMI and two-step procedure also have limited prognostic value.
Authors: Li Wang; Gordon H Guyatt; Sean A Kennedy; Beatriz Romerosa; Henry Y Kwon; Alka Kaushal; Yaping Chang; Samantha Craigie; Carlos P B de Almeida; Rachel J Couban; Shawn R Parascandalo; Zain Izhar; Susan Reid; James S Khan; Michael McGillion; Jason W Busse Journal: CMAJ Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Jan J Kootstra; Josette E H M Hoekstra-Weebers; Johan S Rietman; Jakob de Vries; Peter C Baas; Jan H B Geertzen; Harald J Hoekstra Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-03-11 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Janine T Hidding; Carien H G Beurskens; Philip J van der Wees; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Maria W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: V J L Kuijs; M Moossdorff; R J Schipper; R G H Beets-Tan; E M Heuts; K B M I Keymeulen; M L Smidt; M B I Lobbes Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2015-03-24
Authors: Dominika Kozak; Iwona Głowacka-Mrotek; Tomasz Nowikiewicz; Zygmunt Siedlecki; Wojciech Hagner; Magdalena Sowa; Wojciech Zegarski Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2017-09-16 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Beatriz Ostos-Díaz; María Jesús Casuso-Holgado; María Jesús Muñoz-Fernández; Ana F Carazo; Rocío Martín-Valero; Esther M Medrano-Sánchez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 3.390