Vivian Man1, Ting Ting Wong2, Michael Co1, Dacita Suen1, Ava Kwong3. 1. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Hong Kong Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, K1401, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR. 2. Private Practice Breast Surgeon, The Breast Surgery, Suite 1203, 12/F East Point Center, 555 Hennessy Road, Causeway Bay, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR. 3. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Hong Kong Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, K1401, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR. avakwong@hku.hk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The combined use of radioisotope and blue dye is the gold standard in sentinel lymph node (SLN) localization in early breast cancer. Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) has recently emerged as a non-inferior new tracer in sentinel lymph node mapping with fewer disadvantages. This study represents the first and the largest cohort of superparamagnetic iron oxide application in Asian population. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed from August 2016 to December 2017. All patients with SLN localization by SPIO were included in this study. RESULTS: A total of 328 breast cancer patients with 333 SLNB procedures were included in this study. Median age was 54 years (range 32-86). Median tumor size was 1.9 cm (range 0.1-12 cm).There were 138 breast-conserving surgeries and 195 mastectomies. All patients received injection of SPIO 1 day prior to operation. A total of 329 successful sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) procedures were undertaken with 1514 sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) identified. One hundred and fifty-three (10.1%) of the SLNs were positive for malignancy. There were 54 patients with macrometastases, 26 with micrometastases and 24 with isolated tumor cells. Sixty-seven patients underwent subsequent axillary dissection. Four patients failed sentinel lymph node identification with SPIO. The success rate of SPIO in sentinel lymph node localization was 98.8%. CONCLUSION: SPIO represents a feasible alternative in sentinel lymph node mapping with comparably high nodal detection rate.
BACKGROUND: The combined use of radioisotope and blue dye is the gold standard in sentinel lymph node (SLN) localization in early breast cancer. Superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) has recently emerged as a non-inferior new tracer in sentinel lymph node mapping with fewer disadvantages. This study represents the first and the largest cohort of superparamagnetic iron oxide application in Asian population. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed from August 2016 to December 2017. All patients with SLN localization by SPIO were included in this study. RESULTS: A total of 328 breast cancerpatients with 333 SLNB procedures were included in this study. Median age was 54 years (range 32-86). Median tumor size was 1.9 cm (range 0.1-12 cm).There were 138 breast-conserving surgeries and 195 mastectomies. All patients received injection of SPIO 1 day prior to operation. A total of 329 successful sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) procedures were undertaken with 1514 sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) identified. One hundred and fifty-three (10.1%) of the SLNs were positive for malignancy. There were 54 patients with macrometastases, 26 with micrometastases and 24 with isolated tumor cells. Sixty-seven patients underwent subsequent axillary dissection. Four patients failed sentinel lymph node identification with SPIO. The success rate of SPIO in sentinel lymph node localization was 98.8%. CONCLUSION:SPIO represents a feasible alternative in sentinel lymph node mapping with comparably high nodal detection rate.
Authors: A Piñero-Madrona; J A Torró-Richart; J M de León-Carrillo; G de Castro-Parga; J Navarro-Cecilia; F Domínguez-Cunchillos; J M Román-Santamaría; C Fuster-Diana; R Pardo-García Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: U Veronesi; G Paganelli; G Viale; V Galimberti; A Luini; S Zurrida; C Robertson; V Sacchini; P Veronesi; E Orvieto; C De Cicco; M Intra; G Tosi; D Scarpa Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-02-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marc Thill; Andrzej Kurylcio; Rebekka Welter; Viviana van Haasteren; Britta Grosse; Gilles Berclaz; Wojciech Polkowski; Nik Hauser Journal: Breast Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: B J O'Hea; A D Hill; A M El-Shirbiny; S D Yeh; P P Rosen; D G Coit; P I Borgen; H S Cody Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 1998-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert E Mansel; Lesley Fallowfield; Mark Kissin; Amit Goyal; Robert G Newcombe; J Michael Dixon; Constantinos Yiangou; Kieran Horgan; Nigel Bundred; Ian Monypenny; David England; Mark Sibbering; Tholkifl I Abdullah; Lester Barr; Utheshtra Chetty; Dudley H Sinnett; Anne Fleissig; Dayalan Clarke; Peter J Ell Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: I T Rubio; S Diaz-Botero; A Esgueva; R Rodriguez; T Cortadellas; O Cordoba; M Espinosa-Bravo Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: David N Krag; Stewart J Anderson; Thomas B Julian; Ann M Brown; Seth P Harlow; Takamaru Ashikaga; Donald L Weaver; Barbara J Miller; Lynne M Jalovec; Thomas G Frazier; R Dirk Noyes; André Robidoux; Hugh M C Scarth; Denise M Mammolito; David R McCready; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Jiqiao Yang; Li Xu; Pengcheng Liu; Zhenggui Du; Jie Chen; Faqing Liang; Quanyi Long; Di Zhang; Helin Zeng; Qing Lv Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 3.989