Christian Siso1, Juan de Torres2, Antonio Esgueva-Colmenarejo1,3, Martin Espinosa-Bravo1,3, Neus Rus2, Octavi Cordoba1,3, Roberto Rodriguez1,3, Vicente Peg3,4,5, Isabel T Rubio6,7. 1. Breast Surgical Oncology, Breast Cancer Center, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 2. Breast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Department of Pathology, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 5. Spanish Biomedical Research Network Centre in Oncology (CIBERONC), Barcelona, Spain. 6. Breast Surgical Oncology, Breast Cancer Center, Hospital Universitario Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. irubio@vhio.net. 7. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. irubio@vhio.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been improved with the placement of a clip in the positive node prior to treatment. Several methods have been described for clipped node excision during SLNB after NAT. We assessed the feasibility of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS)-guided excision of the clipped node during SLNB and investigated whether the accuracy of SLNB is improved. METHODS: After approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee, all breast cancer patients undergoing NAT had an US-visible clip placed in the positive node. The ILINA trial consisted of IOUS-guided excision of the clipped node along with SLNB and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). RESULTS: Forty-six patients had a clip placed in the positive node. In two (4.3%) cases, the clip could not be seen prior to surgery and the patient underwent ALND; however, the clipped node was successfully removed by IOUS-guided excision in 44 patients. Thirty-five patients (79.5%) underwent SLNB along with IOUS-guided excision of the clipped node and ALND, and were subsequently included in the ILINA trial. Nine patients were not included (five patients with SLNB only and four patients with ALND without SLNB). SLNB matched the clipped node in 27 (77%) patients. The false negative rate for the ILINA protocol was 4.1% (95% confidence interval 0.1-21.1%). CONCLUSIONS: IOUS-guided excision of the axillary clipped node after NAT was feasible, safe, and successful in 100% of cases. The ILINA trial is accurate in predicting axillary nodal status after NAT.
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been improved with the placement of a clip in the positive node prior to treatment. Several methods have been described for clipped node excision during SLNB after NAT. We assessed the feasibility of intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS)-guided excision of the clipped node during SLNB and investigated whether the accuracy of SLNB is improved. METHODS: After approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee, all breast cancerpatients undergoing NAT had an US-visible clip placed in the positive node. The ILINA trial consisted of IOUS-guided excision of the clipped node along with SLNB and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). RESULTS: Forty-six patients had a clip placed in the positive node. In two (4.3%) cases, the clip could not be seen prior to surgery and the patient underwent ALND; however, the clipped node was successfully removed by IOUS-guided excision in 44 patients. Thirty-five patients (79.5%) underwent SLNB along with IOUS-guided excision of the clipped node and ALND, and were subsequently included in the ILINA trial. Nine patients were not included (five patients with SLNB only and four patients with ALND without SLNB). SLNB matched the clipped node in 27 (77%) patients. The false negative rate for the ILINA protocol was 4.1% (95% confidence interval 0.1-21.1%). CONCLUSIONS: IOUS-guided excision of the axillary clipped node after NAT was feasible, safe, and successful in 100% of cases. The ILINA trial is accurate in predicting axillary nodal status after NAT.
Authors: Sabine R de Wild; Janine M Simons; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Marjolein L Smidt; Linetta B Koppert Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2021-08-17 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Giacomo Montagna; Minna K Lee; Varadan Sevilimedu; Andrea V Barrio; Monica Morrow Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Juan C Vázquez; Antonio Piñero; Francisco J de Castro; Ana Lluch; Miguel Martín; Agustí Barnadas; Emilio Alba; Álvaro Rodríguez-Lescure; Federico Rojo; Julia Giménez; Ivan Solá; Maria J Quintana; Xavier Bonfill; Gerard Urrutia; Pedro Sánchez-Rovira Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2022-09-25 Impact factor: 3.340
Authors: David Pinto; Eva Batista; Pedro Gouveia; Carlos Mavioso; João Anacleto; Joana Ribeiro; Berta Sousa; Helena Gouveia; Arlindo Ferreira; Maurício Chumbo; Maria Antónia Vasconcelos; Mariana Correia; Rita Canas Marques; António Galzerano; Maria José Brito; Celeste Alves; Fátima Cardoso; Maria João Cardoso Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 2.268
Authors: Janine M Simons; Thiemo J A van Nijnatten; Carmen C van der Pol; Paul J van Diest; Agnes Jager; David van Klaveren; Boen L R Kam; Marc B I Lobbes; Maaike de Boer; Cees Verhoef; Paul R A Sars; Harald J Heijmans; Els R M van Haaren; Wouter J Vles; Caroline M E Contant; Marian B E Menke-Pluijmers; Léonie H M Smit; Wendy Kelder; Marike Boskamp; Linetta B Koppert; Ernest J T Luiten; Marjolein L Smidt Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 16.681