4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Sentinel Node Biopsy for Head and Neck Melanoma: A Systematic Review

期刊

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
卷 145, 期 3, 页码 375-382

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1177/0194599811408554

关键词

head and neck melanoma; sentinel lymph node biopsy; false-negative rate; systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. This systematic review was conducted to examine the test performance of sentinel node biopsy in head and neck melanoma, including the identification rate and false-negative rate. Data Sources. PubMed, EMBASE, ASCO, and SSO database searches were conducted to identify studies fulfilling the following inclusion criteria: sentinel node biopsy was performed, lesions were located on the head and neck, and recurrence data for both metastatic and nonmetastatic patients were reported. Review Methods. Dual-blind data extraction was conducted. Primary outcomes included identification rate and test performance based on completion neck dissection or nodal recurrence. Results. A total of 3442 patients from 32 studies published between 1990 and 2009 were reviewed. Seventy-eight percent of studies were retrospective and 22% were prospective. Trials varied from 9 to 755 patients (median 55). Mean Breslow depth was 2.53 mm. Median sentinel node biopsy identification rate was 95.2%. More than 1 basin was reported in 33.1% of patients. A median of 2.56 sentinel nodes per patient were excised. Sentinel node biopsy was positive in 15% of patients. Subsequent completion neck dissection was performed in almost all of these patients and revealed additional positive nodes in 13.67%. Median follow-up was 31 months. Across all studies, predictive value positive for nodal recurrence was 13.1% and posttest probability negative was 5%. Median false-negative rate for nodal recurrence was 20.4%. Conclusion. Sentinel node biopsy of head and neck melanoma is associated with an increased false-negative rate compared with studies of non-head and neck lesions. Positive sentinel node status is highly predictive of recurrence.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据