BACKGROUND: Eleven quality indicators (QI) for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) were previously developed through a consensus-based approach, yet still need to be incorporated into clinical practice. We sought to evaluate the applicability and clinical relevance for surgeons. METHODS: Breast cancer patients undergoing SLNB between 2004 and 2008 at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, were evaluated. Clinical and pathological data were obtained from an institutional database. Information on axillary recurrences was obtained through a retrospective chart review. Adherence to standardized protocols was evaluated in each case. RESULTS: All 11 QIs were measurable in 300 patients. The identification rate was 100%. More than 1 SLN was identified in 78.6% of patients. The SLNB was performed simultaneously with primary surgery in 96.7% of patients; 61 SLNs harboured metastasis. Of these patients, 80.3% underwent completion lymphadenectomy. Cases complied with protocols for radiocolloid injection and pathologic SLN evaluation/reporting. No ineligible patients underwent SLNB. Of patients with a complete 5-year follow-up (n = 42), only 1 had axillary recurrence. CONCLUSION: Applying QIs for SLNB was feasible, but modifications were necessary to develop a more practical approach to quality assessment. Of the 11 suggested QIs, those that encompass protocols (nuclear medicine and pathology) should be reclassified as prerequisites, as they are independent of the technical aspect of SLNB performance. The remaining 8 QIs encompass surgery per se and should be measured routinely by surgeons. Furthermore, concise and clinically relevant target rates are necessary for these QIs to be established as widely recognized control standards.
BACKGROUND: Eleven quality indicators (QI) for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) were previously developed through a consensus-based approach, yet still need to be incorporated into clinical practice. We sought to evaluate the applicability and clinical relevance for surgeons. METHODS:Breast cancerpatients undergoing SLNB between 2004 and 2008 at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, were evaluated. Clinical and pathological data were obtained from an institutional database. Information on axillary recurrences was obtained through a retrospective chart review. Adherence to standardized protocols was evaluated in each case. RESULTS: All 11 QIs were measurable in 300 patients. The identification rate was 100%. More than 1 SLN was identified in 78.6% of patients. The SLNB was performed simultaneously with primary surgery in 96.7% of patients; 61 SLNs harboured metastasis. Of these patients, 80.3% underwent completion lymphadenectomy. Cases complied with protocols for radiocolloid injection and pathologic SLN evaluation/reporting. No ineligible patients underwent SLNB. Of patients with a complete 5-year follow-up (n = 42), only 1 had axillary recurrence. CONCLUSION: Applying QIs for SLNB was feasible, but modifications were necessary to develop a more practical approach to quality assessment. Of the 11 suggested QIs, those that encompass protocols (nuclear medicine and pathology) should be reclassified as prerequisites, as they are independent of the technical aspect of SLNB performance. The remaining 8 QIs encompass surgery per se and should be measured routinely by surgeons. Furthermore, concise and clinically relevant target rates are necessary for these QIs to be established as widely recognized control standards.
Authors: L Tabár; B Vitak; H H Chen; S W Duffy; M F Yen; C F Chiang; U B Krusemo; T Tot; R A Smith Journal: Radiol Clin North Am Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Anton Haid; Roswitha Köberle-Wührer; Michael Knauer; Judit Burtscher; Heinz Fritzsche; William Peschina; Zerina Jasarevic; Maria Ammann; Klaus Hergan; Heinz Sturn; Gerhard Zimmermann Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: S L Wong; M J Edwards; C Chao; T M Tuttle; R D Noyes; D J Carlson; P B Cerrito; K M McMasters Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: A E Giuliano; P I Haigh; M B Brennan; N M Hansen; M C Kelley; W Ye; E C Glass; R R Turner Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J M Ververs; R M Roumen; A J Vingerhoets; G Vreugdenhil; J W Coebergh; M A Crommelin; E J Luiten; O J Repelaer van Driel; M Schijven; J C Wissing; A C Voogd Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 9.162