| Literature DB >> 34734008 |
Keyu Jiang1, Binlin Luo1, Zuoqiong Hou1, Chujun Li1, Huiming Cai2, Jian Tang1, Gang Yao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node status is an independent influencing factor for the prognosis of acral malignant melanoma, and the accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is directly related to the judgment of regional lymph node status. This study aimed to explore the application value of indocyanine green (ICG) surgical fluorescence imaging system in the SLNB of acral malignant melanoma.Entities:
Keywords: Acral malignant melanoma; indocyanine green (ICG); methylene blue (MB); sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)
Year: 2021 PMID: 34734008 PMCID: PMC8506787 DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-4366
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Intraoperative ICG fluorescence imaging of a patient with lower extremity malignant melanoma. ICG, indocyanine green; SLN, sentinel lymph node.
Figure 2Representative SLN detecting images of ICG, MB. The red arrow marks the lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes that are traced. ICG, indocyanine green; MB, methylene blue; SLN, sentinel lymph node.
Tumor characteristics of 22 patients with melanoma
| Patient number | Gender | Age (year) | BMI | Primary site | Breslow thickness (mm) | Ulcer | Preoperative ICG observation | SLN number (I/M) | ICG (+) | MB (+) | Transferred SLN number | SLN recurrence or metastasis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Male | 48 | 23.18 | Heel (R) | 7.0 | Yes | Yes | 4 | 4 | 3 | 0 | No |
| 2 | Male | 72 | 21.45 | Heel (R) | 3.5 | Yes | Yes | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | No |
| 3 | Female | 55 | 23.83 | Pelma (R) | 1.3 | No | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | No |
| 4 | Male | 32 | 25.76 | Hallux (L) | 7.0 | No | Yes | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | No |
| 5 | Female | 67 | 24.30 | Fourth toe (R) | – | Yes | Yes | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | No |
| 6 | Male | 31 | 26.70 | Pelma (L) | – | Yes | Yes | 4 | 4 | 3 | 0 | No |
| 7 | Male | 77 | 20.95 | Middle finger (R) | – | Yes | Yes | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | No |
| 8 | Male | 41 | 32.74 | Thumb (L) | 2.0 | Yes | No | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | No |
| 9 | Male | 76 | 17.99 | Palm (R) | 5.0 | Yes | Yes | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | No |
| 10 | Female | 67 | 20.79 | Hallux (L) | 4.0 | Yes | Yes | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | No |
| 11 | Female | 55 | 20.19 | Thumb (L) | 7.0 | No | Yes | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | No |
| 12 | Female | 55 | 23.72 | Dorsum of foot (L) | 2.0 | No | Yes | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | No |
| 13 | Male | 72 | 23.04 | Arch of the foot (R) | 1.3 | Yes | Yes | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | No |
| 14 | Male | 52 | 28.02 | Heel (R) | 16.0 | No | Yes | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | No |
| 15 | Male | 57 | 21.06 | Pelma (R) | – | Yes | Yes | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | No |
| 16 | Female | 59 | 20.02 | Dorsum of foot (R) | – | Yes | Yes | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | No |
| 17 | Female | 86 | 22.89 | Hallux (R) | 2.5 | No | Yes | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | No |
| 18 | Male | 73 | 23.87 | Thumb (L) | – | Yes | Yes | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | No |
| 19 | Female | 77 | 18.02 | Heel (L) | 5.5 | Yes | Yes | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | No |
| 20 | Female | 56 | 32 | Pelma (R) | 5 | No | No | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | No |
| 21 | Male | 57 | 23.78 | Pelma (L) | 3.7 | No | Yes | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | No |
| 22 | Female | 63 | 27.67 | Pelma (L) | 2.1 | Yes | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | No |
ICG, indocyanine green; SLN, sentinel lymph node; BMI, body mass index; MB, methylene blue; R, right; L, left.
Detection rate of lymph nodes and metastatic lymph nodes with different tracers
| Patient number | SLN number | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 22 | 56 |
| ICG(+) | 22 | 55 |
| MB(+) | 19 | 41 |
| ICG(+) MB(−) | 3 | 4 |
| ICG(−) MB(+) | 1 | 1 |
| Detection rate | ||
| ICG | 22 (100%) | 55 (98%) |
| MB | 19 (86%) | 41 (73%) |
| ICG + MB | 22 (100%) | 56 (100%) |
| Detection rate of SLN metastasis | ||
| ICG | 6 (27%) | 9 (100%) |
| MB | 5 (23%) | 8 (89%) |
| ICG + MB | 6 (27%) | 9 (100%) |
ICG, indocyanine green; SLN, sentinel lymph node; MB, methylene blue.