Literature DB >> 24591995

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer: description of the technique and preliminary results.

Oğuzhan Kuru1, Samet Topuz1, Serhat Sen1, Cem Iyibozkurt1, Sinan Berkman1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To measure the feasibility of sentinel lymph node technique in endometrial cancer.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective non-randomized case-control trial. Between 2010-2011, in Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical Faculty, Gynecologic Oncology department, 26 patients who were preoperatively evaluated as endometrial cancer enrolled in the study. Patients' detailed informed consent and ethics committee approval were obtained. Sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection rate was determined as the primary outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and particularly false negative results were determined as secondary outcomes. As a technique of SLN, injection of methylene blue to the subserosal myometrium of the uterine fundus via 5 cc syringe following peritoneal aspiration cytology procedure was obtained. Surgery was made after injection for an average of 5 minutes due to the physiological spread of the blue dye. Then, the standard protocol of hysterectomy was performed and the retroperitoneum was opened to perform lymphadenectomy. The presence of lymph node regions, and presence of a sentinel node was recorded on the trial record form. Positive staining nodes were sent separately for pathological examination. In the course of the study due to insufficient rate of staining, the technique has been changed to cervical and multiple uterine injections.
RESULTS: As the primary outcome, an SLN positivity rate of 23% in 6 patients with a total of 8 lymph nodes were found. The remarkable finding was that in the first technique, the rate was 1/16 (6%), while the second technique, 5/10 (50%), respectively. The difference is statistically significant (p=0.001). In endometrial cancer stage I and II, secondary outcomes for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value were 23%, 0%, 100%, 43%, respectively. Because there were no metastatic lymph nodes found, false negative rate was 0%.
CONCLUSION: SLN approach is not valuable enough to eliminate the need for lymphadenectomy. On the other hand, it facilitates scanning micrometastases and ultrastaging, while its clinical value has not yet been established. However, according to the recent pilot studies, it provides a means for assessing micrometastases for the medium-risk group for local recurrence.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sentinel lymph node; endometrium cancer; surgical staging

Year:  2011        PMID: 24591995      PMCID: PMC3939250          DOI: 10.5152/jtgga.2011.52

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc        ISSN: 1309-0380


  10 in total

1.  Cancer statistics, 1990.

Authors:  E Silverberg; C C Boring; T S Squires
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1990 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

2.  Potential therapeutic role of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in node-positive endometrial cancer.

Authors:  A Mariani; M J Webb; L Galli; K C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  Endometrial cancer: is surgical staging necessary?

Authors:  J W Orr; P Y Roland; D Leichter; P F Orr
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.645

4.  Retrospective analysis of selective lymphadenectomy in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Janiel M Cragun; Laura J Havrilesky; Brian Calingaert; Ingrid Synan; Angeles Alvarez Secord; John T Soper; Daniel L Clarke-Pearson; Andrew Berchuck
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-02-28       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Prognostic factors associated with recurrence in clinical stage I adenocarcinoma of the endometrium.

Authors:  J R Lurain; B L Rice; A W Rademaker; L E Poggensee; J C Schink; D S Miller
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Detection of sentinel lymph nodes with lymphazurin in cervical, uterine, and vulvar malignancies.

Authors:  M L Echt; M A Finan; M S Hoffman; R C Kline; W S Roberts; J V Fiorica
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 0.954

7.  Predictors of lymphatic failure in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Andrea Mariani; Maurice J Webb; Gary L Keeney; Giacomo Aletti; Karl C Podratz
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Comparison of two procedures for sentinel lymph node detection in patients with endometrial cancer: a pilot study.

Authors:  Z Holub; A Jabor; L Kliment
Journal:  Eur J Gynaecol Oncol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 0.196

9.  Cancer statistics, 2007.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Elizabeth Ward; Taylor Murray; Jiaquan Xu; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

10.  Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: survival comparisons of patients with and without pelvic node sampling.

Authors:  L C Kilgore; E E Partridge; R D Alvarez; J M Austin; H M Shingleton; F Noojin; W Conner
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 5.482

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Sentinel lymph node mapping in early stage of endometrial and cervical cancers.

Authors:  Tajossadat Allameh; Vahidehsadat Hashemi; Fereshteh Mohammadizadeh; Fariba Behnamfar
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.852

2.  Sentinel node biopsy for diagnosis of lymph node involvement in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Hans Nagar; Nina Wietek; Richard J Goodall; Will Hughes; Mia Schmidt-Hansen; Jo Morrison
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-06-09

3.  Sentinel lymph node mapping in gynecological oncology.

Authors:  Jiang Du; Yaling Li; Qing Wang; Nasra Batchu; Junkai Zou; Chao Sun; Shulan Lv; Qing Song; Qiling Li
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 2.967

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.