Literature DB >> 24561692

Sentinel lymph node mapping in melanoma: the issue of false-negative findings.

Gianpiero Manca1, Domenico Rubello, Antonella Romanini, Giuseppe Boni, Serena Chiacchio, Manuel Tredici, Sara Mazzarri, Valerio Duce, Patrick M Colletti, Duccio Volterrani, Giuliano Mariani.   

Abstract

Management of cutaneous melanoma has changed after introduction in the clinical routine of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for nodal staging. By defining the nodal basin status, SLNB provides a powerful prognostic information. Nevertheless, some debate still surrounds the accuracy of this procedure in terms of false-negative rate. Several large-scale studies have reported a relatively high false-negative rate (5.6%-21%), correctly defined as the proportion of false-negative results with respect to the total number of "actual" positive lymph nodes. In this review, we identified all the technical aspects that the nuclear medicine physician, the surgeon, and the pathologist should take into account to improve accuracy of the procedure and minimize the false-negative rate. In particular, SPECT/CT imaging detects more SLNs than those found by planar lymphoscintigraphy. Furthermore, the nuclear medicine community should reach a consensus on the radioactive counting rate threshold to better guide the surgeon in identifying the lymph nodes with the highest likelihood of housing metastases ("true biologic SLNs"). Analysis of the harvested SLNs by conventional techniques is also a further potential source for error. More accurate SLN analysis (eg, molecular analysis by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction) and more extensive SLN sampling identify more positive nodes, thus reducing the false-negative rate.The clinical factors identifying patients at higher-risk local recurrence after a negative SLNB include older age at diagnosis, deeper lesions, histological ulceration, and head-neck anatomic location of the primary lesion.The clinical impact of a false-negative SLNB on the prognosis of melanoma patients remains controversial, because the majority of studies have failed to demonstrate overall statistically significant disadvantage in melanoma-specific survival for false-negative SLNB patients compared with true-positive SLNB patients.When new more effective drugs will be available in the adjuvant setting for stage III melanoma patients, the implication of an accurate staging procedure for the sentinel lymph nodes will be crucial for both patients and clinicians. Standardization and accuracy of SLN identification, removal, and analysis are required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24561692     DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000366

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Nucl Med        ISSN: 0363-9762            Impact factor:   7.794


  4 in total

Review 1.  Sentinel lymph node biopsy in small papillary thyroid cancer. A review on novel surgical techniques.

Authors:  Ludovico Maria Garau; Domenico Rubello; Alice Ferretti; Giuseppe Boni; Duccio Volterrani; Gianpiero Manca
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 3.633

2.  Locoregional Lymph Node Recurrence of Trunk Melanoma in Non-sentinel Lymph Node Basins: An Observational Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Ruggero Moro; Jessica González-Ramos; Silvestre Martínez-García; Celia Requena; Victor Traves; Esperanza Manrique-Silva; Eduardo Nagore
Journal:  Acta Derm Venereol       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 3.875

3.  The Value of 320-Slice Spiral Computed Tomography Perfusion Imaging in Staging and Long-Term Dynamic Evaluation of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Hequn Geng; Zhilin Zhang; Xiaochen Zhang; Zhandong Liang; Yong Li; Shujun Cui
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-07-21       Impact factor: 2.809

4.  Nodal Basin Recurrence After Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Melanoma: A Retrospective Multicenter Study in 2653 Patients.

Authors:  Lutz Kretschmer; Hans Peter Bertsch; Antonia Zapf; Christina Mitteldorf; Imke Satzger; Kai-Martin Thoms; Bernward Völker; Michael Peter Schön; Ralf Gutzmer; Hans Starz
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.817

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.