4.7 Article

Effect of increased 99mTc/99Tc ratios on count rates in sentinel node procedures:: a randomised study

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1227-9

Keywords

colloid; sentinel node; breast cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to evaluate the count rates of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in patients with breast cancer in the operating theatre, using Tc-99m-Nanocoll with different ratios of technetium-99m to technetium-99. After written informed consent had been obtained, we tested different ratios of Tc-99m/Tc-99-Nanocoll in a double-blinded randomised study performed in 161 patients. Twenty-five MBq/mug Tc-99m-colloid albumin was prepared in vacuum. In 87 patients (group A) a 2-h elution was used and in 74 patients (group B) a 24-h elution was used. Patients were subcategorised into subgroups 1 and 3, in which an SLN procedure for breast carcinoma was performed simultaneously with lumpectomy, and subgroups 2 and 4, in which an SLN procedure was performed 2-3 weeks after prior excision biopsy. All patients were injected along the lateral border of the areola (two injections: 50 MBq/0.3 ml intradermally and 50 MBq/2 ml intraparenchymally). Ex vivo measurement of count rates was performed with a gamma probe. Comparing groups A and B in respect of registered counts per second (cps) of excised SLNs, a significant difference was found (P<0.004). When comparisons were made between subgroups 1 and 2 (2-h elution) and between subgroups 3 and 4 (24-h elution) in respect of registered cps of excised SLNs, no significant difference was found (subgroup 1 vs 2, P=0.825; subgroup 3 vs 4, P=0.915). Use of a 2-h elution in vacuum yielded a significantly higher count rate of maximum specific activity of Tc-99m-colloid albumin in SLNs than was achieved using a 24-h elution in vacuum. SLN procedures performed 2-3 weeks after prior excision biopsy proved reliable as compared to SLN procedures performed simultaneously with lumpectomy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available