| Literature DB >> 32448808 |
Victor Lago1,2,3, Pilar Bello4, Beatriz Montero5, Luis Matute6, Pablo Padilla-Iserte6, Susana Lopez5, Tiermes Marina6, Marc Agudelo4, Santiago Domingo6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Early-stage ovarian cancer might represent an ideal disease scenario for sentinel lymph node application. Nevertheless, the published experience seems to be limited. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and safety concerns of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with clinical stage I-II ovarian cancer.Entities:
Keywords: ovarian cancer; sentinel lymph node; surgical oncology
Year: 2020 PMID: 32448808 PMCID: PMC7497563 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer ISSN: 1048-891X Impact factor: 3.437
Figure 1Sentinel lymph node technique in ovarian cancer. 1 and 2: In cases of previously unconfirmed malignant histology, the suspicious ovarian tumor was removed. 3: The surgical specimen was submitted for frozen sectioning. In case of malignancy, the SLN technique was performed. 4: The injection points were at the infundibulopelvic and ovarian stumps. 5: A saline solution containing 99mTC nanocoloid and ICG were injected subperitoneally at each point. 6: Guided by the acoustic signal of a gamma probe and NIR/ICG system, a minimum dissection looking for the hottest SLN dyed with indocyanine green SLN/s in the pelvic/paraaortic region was performed.
Figure 2Sentinel lymph node technique scheme.
Figure 3Flow chart of patients included in the study.
Patients' baseline and surgical characteristics
|
| |
|
| |
| Confirmed | 9 (45) |
| Suspicious | 11(55) |
|
| 50±9 (35-68) |
|
| 24.5±4.8 |
|
| |
| None | 11(55) |
| Unilateral Anexectomy | 4 (20) |
| Bilateral Anexectomy | 1 (5) |
| Bilateral Anexectomy+Hysterectomy | 4 (20) |
|
| 155.6±241 (6.9–818) |
|
| 114.7±204 (2-875) |
|
| |
| I-II | 17.0 (85) |
| III | 3.0 (15) |
|
| |
| Laparoscopy | 9 (45) |
| Laparotomy | 11 (55) |
|
| |
| Frozen section+Surgical staging | 11 (55) |
| Differed surgical staging | 9 (45) |
|
| 108.7±72.7 (2–250) |
|
| 77.5±103 (0–400) |
|
| |
| Left | 10 (50) |
| Right | 9 (45) |
| Bilateral | 1 (5) |
|
| 257.5±114 (100-500) |
|
| 0 (0) |
|
| 275±29 (210-320) |
|
| |
| No | 18 (90) |
| Vascular injury | 2 (5) |
ASA; BMI, body mass index; FIGO, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Sentinel lymph node procedure
|
|
| |
|
| ||
| Not applicable (HT performed) | 5 (25) | – |
| Unilateral | 14 (70) | – |
| Bilateral | 1 (5) | – |
|
| ||
| No | 1 (6.7) | – |
| Unilateral | 13 (86.7) | – |
| Bilateral | 1 (6.7) | – |
|
| ||
| Unilateral | 19 (95) | – |
| Bilateral | 1 (5) | – |
|
| ||
| No | 0 (0) | – |
| Unilateral | 16 (80) | – |
| Bilateral | 4 (20) | – |
|
| ||
| Pelvic (n15) | 14 (93.3) | 66% to 100% |
| Paraortic (n20) | 20 (100) | 80% to 100% |
| Pelvic and para-aortic | 19 (95) | 73% to 100% |
| Pelvic and/or para-aortic | 20 (100) | 80% to 100% |
|
| ||
| Intra-operative lymphography | 1 (5) | 0% to 27% |
| Tc 99m | 20 (100) | 80% to 100% |
| ICG | 19 (95) | 73% to 100% |
| Both (Tc 99m+ ICG) | 20 (100) | 80% to 100% |
|
| 53±15 (30–80) | 46.5 to 60.8 min |
HT, hysterectomy; ICG, Indocyanine green; SLN, sentinel lymph node.
Figure 4Sentinel lymph node distribution.
Inpatient and final histologic results
|
| 3.7±1.1 (2–6) |
|
| |
| Grade I | 0 (0) |
| Grade II | 1 (5) |
| Grade III | 1 (5) |
| Grade IV | 0 (0) |
| Grade V | 0 (0) |
|
| 0 (0) |
|
| |
| Serous | 4 (20) |
| Endometrioid | 8 (40) |
| Mucinous | 2 (10) |
| Clear cells | 5 (25) |
| Other | 1 (5) |
|
| |
| G1 | 8 (40) |
| G2 | 0 (0) |
| G3 | 11 (55) |
| Not applicable (disgerminoma) | 1 (5) |
|
| 0 (0) |
|
| |
| IA | 7 (35) |
| IC | 11 (55) |
| IIA | 1 (5) |
| IIIB | 1 (5) |
|
| 20.1±7.6 (9–74) |
|
| 19.8±10.4 (6–40) |
|
| 2.2±1.5 (0–5) |
|
| 3.3±1.8 (1–7) |
FIGO, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; ICG, Indocyanine green; LND, lymphadenectomy; LVI, lymph vascular invasion; SLN, sentinel lymph node.