| Literature DB >> 30830536 |
Fredrik Wärnberg1, Evelina Stigberg2, Christine Obondo2,3, Helena Olofsson4,5, Shahin Abdsaleh2,6, Madeleine Wärnberg7, Andreas Karakatsanis2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30830536 PMCID: PMC6456719 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-019-07239-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Surg Oncol ISSN: 1068-9265 Impact factor: 5.344
Fig. 1Self-reported intensity of staining after a SPIO injection was based a scale from zero to five. The women received this intensity scale per mail or per letter
Patient and tumor characteristics in breast cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy using superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) for sentinel node detection
| Patient and tumor characteristics | SPIO injection site | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retro-areolar, | Peritumoral, | |||||
| Mastectomy + BCS SN detection | BCS skin staining | Mastectomy + BCS SN detection | BCS skin staining | |||
| Number of surgical operations | 177 | 110 | 156 | 148 | Mastectomy + BCS | BCS |
| Age, years (mean, range) | 63.7 (32–89) | 63.1 (34–82) | 63.0 (34–82) | 62.8 (39–79) | 0.543a | 0.820a |
| BMI, kg/m2 (mean, range) | 27.6 (17.4–42.1) | 25.8 (17.4–42.1) | 26.7 (18.0–41.6) | 26.0 (18.0–41.6) | 0.795a | 0.778a |
| Tumour size, mm (mean, range) | 22.7 (2–123) | 16.1 (2–80) | 18.2 (2–103) | 16.3 (2–63) | 0.006a | 0.864a |
| Nuclear grade | ||||||
| 1 | 26 (14.7%) | 18 (16.4%) | 44 (28.2%) | 43 (29.1%) | 0.026b | 0.008b |
| 2 | 86 (48.6%) | 59 (53.6%) | 61 (39.1%) | 59 (39.9%) | ||
| 3 | 50 (28.2%) | 24 (21.8%) | 44 (28.2%) | 42 (28.4%) | ||
| Missing | 15 (8.5%) | 9 (8.2%) | 7 (4.5%) | 4 (2.7%) | ||
| Histopathology | ||||||
| Ductal invasive | 124 (70.1%) | 79 (71.8%) | 124 (79.5%) | 113 (76.4%) | 0.647b | 0.859b |
| Lobular invasive | 25 (14.1%) | 6 (14.5%) | 20 (12.8%) | 8 (12.2%) | ||
| DCIS/LCIS | 17 (9.6%) | 9 (8.2%)6 (5.5%) | 6 (3.8%) | 11 (7.4%) | ||
| Other | 11 (6.2%) | 6 (3.8%) | 6 (4.1%) | |||
In the two cohorts, a retro-areolar injection or a deeper peritumoral injection were used, respectively. All patients (breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy) and those with breast-conserving surgery only are presented in separate columns
BCS breast-conserving surgery
aStudent’s t test
bChi square test
Fig. 2Incidence and self-assessed size of skin staining after a retro-areolar or peritumoral injection of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) for sentinel lymph node detection in women with breast-conserving surgery
Incidence and self-assessed size of skin staining after a retro-areolar or peritumoral injection of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) for sentinel lymph node detection in women with breast-conserving surgery (BCS)
| 3 weeks | 6 months | 12 months | 24 months | 36 months | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All women undergoing BCS | 110 | 107 | 107 | 107 | 104 |
| Skin staining (%) | 67.3 | 65.4 | 63.6 | 58.1 | 46.2 |
| Size cm2 (mean) | 16.3 | 13.8 | 11.6 | 8.7 | 6.6 |
| Cosmetic outcome, 0–5 (mean) | – | 1.3 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Only those women with a remaining stain at each time point (number) | 74 | 70 | 68 | 61 | 48 |
| Size cm2, (mean) | 24.2 | 21.1 | 18.2 | 15.1 | 14.0 |
| Cosmetic outcome, 0–5 (mean) | – | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.4 |
|
| |||||
| All women undergoing BCS | 148 | 147 | 147 | 121 | 117 |
| Skin staining (%) | 37.8 | 34.0 | 31.3 | 14.0 | 9.4 |
| Size cm2 (mean) | 6.8 | 5.1 | 4.5 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
| Cosmetic outcome, 0–5 (mean) | – | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| Only those women with a remaining stain at each time point (number) | 56 | 50 | 46 | 17 | 11 |
| Size cm2 (mean) | 17.9 | 15.1 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 18.8 |
| Cosmetic outcome, 0–5 (mean) | – | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.0 |
Cosmetic outcome was self-assessed according to a Likert item scale 0–5: 0 = not a problem; 1 = slight problem; 2 = minor problem; 3 = clearly a problem; 4 = considerable problem; 5 = important problem