G Holl1, R Dorn, H Wengenmair, D Weckermann, J Sciuk. 1. Nuclear Medicine Clinic, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany. gabriele.holl@klinikum-augsburg.de
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) has replaced extended lymphadenectomy for nodal staging in several solid tumours. We present our results of SLND in prostate cancer in regard to detection and false-negative rate. METHODS: In a 2-day protocol about 300 MBq (99m)Tc-nanocolloid are injected into the prostate. Two hours later static scans of the pelvis are performed to get information about the number and location of radioactive lymph nodes. During surgery the radioactive nodes are excised with the help of a gamma probe and sent separately to the pathologist. The histological procedure includes haematoxylin and eosin staining, serial sections and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Since 1999, a total of 2,020 men underwent SLND alone or in combination with either standard or extended lymphadenectomy after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Lymph nodes positive for metastases were found in 16.7% of patients. The scintigraphic detection rate was 97.6% and the intraoperative detection rate 98%. For 187 lymph node-positive men who had either standard or extended lymphadenectomy in addition to SLND the false-negative rate could be calculated, resulting in false-negative findings in 11 of 187 patients (6%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that SLND in prostate cancer is a reliable procedure for nodal staging.
PURPOSE: Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) has replaced extended lymphadenectomy for nodal staging in several solid tumours. We present our results of SLND in prostate cancer in regard to detection and false-negative rate. METHODS: In a 2-day protocol about 300 MBq (99m)Tc-nanocolloid are injected into the prostate. Two hours later static scans of the pelvis are performed to get information about the number and location of radioactive lymph nodes. During surgery the radioactive nodes are excised with the help of a gamma probe and sent separately to the pathologist. The histological procedure includes haematoxylin and eosin staining, serial sections and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Since 1999, a total of 2,020 men underwent SLND alone or in combination with either standard or extended lymphadenectomy after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Lymph nodes positive for metastases were found in 16.7% of patients. The scintigraphic detection rate was 97.6% and the intraoperative detection rate 98%. For 187 lymph node-positive men who had either standard or extended lymphadenectomy in addition to SLND the false-negative rate could be calculated, resulting in false-negative findings in 11 of 187 patients (6%). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that SLND in prostate cancer is a reliable procedure for nodal staging.
Authors: Thorsten Kuehn; Andreas Bembenek; Thomas Decker; Dieter Ludwig Munz; Marie-Luise Sautter-Bihl; Michael Untch; Diethelm Wallwiener Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Friedhelm Wawroschek; Harry Vogt; Hermann Wengenmair; Dorothea Weckermann; Michael Hamm; Mathias Keil; Gerhard Graf; Peter Heidenreich; Rolf Harzmann Journal: Urol Int Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Friedhelm Wawroschek; Theodor Wagner; Michael Hamm; Dorothea Weckermann; Harry Vogt; Bruno Märkl; Ronald Gordijn; Rolf Harzmann Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sean P Stroup; Christopher J Kane; Salman Farchshchi-Heydari; Claude M James; Christopher H Davis; Anne M Wallace; Carl K Hoh; David R Vera Journal: Clin Exp Metastasis Date: 2012-06-20 Impact factor: 5.150
Authors: David Schilling; Ulf Boekeler; Georgios Gakis; Christian Schwentner; Stefan Corvin; Karl Sotlar; Arndt-Christian Müller; Roland Bares; Arnulf Stenzl Journal: World J Urol Date: 2010-03-27 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Alessandro Conti; Matteo Santoni; Luciano Burattini; Marina Scarpelli; Roberta Mazzucchelli; Andrea B Galosi; Liang Cheng; Antonio Lopez-Beltran; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi; Rodolfo Montironi Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Michal Staník; Ivo Čapák; Daniel Macík; Jiří Vašina; Eva Lžičařová; Jiří Jarkovský; Martin Šustr; David Miklánek; Jan Doležel Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2014-03-29 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Hanneke J M Meijer; Oscar A Debats; Emile N J Th van Lin; Marco van Vulpen; J Alfred Witjes; Wim J G Oyen; Jelle O Barentsz; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Michael A Liss; Salman Farshchi-Heydari; Zhengtao Qin; Sean A Hickey; David J Hall; Christopher J Kane; David R Vera Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-07-14 Impact factor: 10.057