| Literature DB >> 28503075 |
Thalia Petropoulou1, Antonia Kapoula2, Aikaterini Mastoraki3, Aikaterini Politi2, Eleni Spanidou-Karvouni2, Ioannis Psychogios1, Ioannis Vassiliou1, Nikolaos Arkadopoulos3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is the gold standard for surgical staging of the axilla in breast cancer (BC). Frozen section (FS) remains the most popular means of intraoperative SLN diagnosis. Imprint cytology (IC) has also been suggested as a less expensive and equally accurate alternative to FS. The aim of our study was to perform a direct comparison between IC and FS on the same SLNs of BC cases operated in a single center by the same surgical team.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; frozen section; imprint cytology; sentinel lymph node biopsy
Year: 2017 PMID: 28503075 PMCID: PMC5426473 DOI: 10.2147/BCTT.S130987
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) ISSN: 1179-1314
Figure 1Identification of “hot” and blue nodes in a surgical specimen of sentinel lymph node biopsy.
Tumors’ characteristics in invasive breast cancer patients submitted to sentinel lymph node biopsy
| Patients | N=60 |
|---|---|
| SLNs | 80 |
| SLN/Patient | 1.33 |
| Mean age | 61.3 |
| Mean tumor size in SLN (+) patients | 2.34±1.53 cm |
| Mean tumor size in SLN (−) patients | 1.58±0.68 cm |
| Positive cases | 10 |
| Negative cases | 50 |
Abbreviation: SLN, sentinel lymph node.
Figure 2Correlation between the percentage of positive sentinel lymph nodes and tumor size in 60 breast cancer patients.
Comparison of imprint cytology, frozen sectioning, and immunohistochemistry analysis in invasive breast cancer patients submitted to sentinel lymph node biopsy
| Number of patients | Imprint cytology
| Frozen sectioning
| Immunohistochemistry
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | ||
| Nagashima et al | 124 | 62 | 99 | 79 | 100 | N/A | N/A |
| Sauer et al | 214 | 51 | 98 | 75 | 99 | N/A | N/A |
| Leidenius et al | 375 | 68 | 99 | 83 | 99 | N/A | N/A |
| Beach et al | 32 | 69 | 100 | 54 | 100 | N/A | N/A |
| Celebioglu et al | 100 | 51 | N/A | 73.5 | N/A | 75.5 | N/A |
| Safai et al | 49 | 90 | 100 | 90 | 100 | 90 | 100 |
| Francz et al | N/A | 69.4 | 97.8 | 68.5 | 98.9 | 68.5 | 98.9 |
| Upender et al | 40 | 91.7 | 100 | 95.8 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Mori et al | 183 | 47.1 | 88.2 | 88.2 | 98.3 | N/A | N/A |
| Lumachi et al | 126 | 70.3 | 91.9 | 75.7 | 100 | N/A | N/A |
| Krishnamurthy et al | 100 | 50 | 100 | 72 | 97.5 | 78 | 100 |
| Our study | 60 | 90 | 100 | 80 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Abbreviation: N/A, not available.