4.6 Article

Blue dye versus combined blue dye-radioactive tracer technique in detection of sentinel lymph node in breast cancer

期刊

EJSO
卷 30, 期 9, 页码 913-917

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2004.08.003

关键词

sentinel lymph node biopsy; breast cancer; staging; blue dye; gamma probe

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer can be used to select patients in which axillary lymph node dissection could be avoided. In this study we compared the value of two methods for identification of sentinel node (SN) using either only blue dye or combination of blue dye and radioactive tracer. Material and methods. All patients were women with clinically T1-2N0M0 breast cancer. They were randomized into two groups. In Group A (50 patients) SN marking was performed only with blue dye and in Group B (100 patients) combined SN marking with blue dye and radiotracer was done. We used 2 ml of blue dye Patentblau V(R) (Byk Gulden). Radiotracer was Antimony sulfide marked with Tc 99m and of 0.3 mCy (11.1 MBq) activity. Application method of both contrasts was peritumoral. After SN biopsy all. patients underwent mastectomy or conservative surgery with axillary Lymph node dissection of Levels I and II. Results. In Group A mean of 1.7 SNs were identified (median 1, range 1-4). False-negative rate in this group was 3/17 (17.6%) with negative-predictive value 20/23 (86.9%), sensitivity 14/17 (82%), specificity 20/33 (60%) and accuracy 34/50 (68%). In Group B mean number of SNs excised per case was 1.6 (median 1, range 1-5). False-negative rate was 2/44 (4.5%), negative-predictive value 41/43 (95.3%), sensitivity 42/44 (95%), specificity 41/56 (73%) and accuracy 83/100 (83%). The combination technique was significantly superior to blue-dye atone technique for negative-predictive value (p=0.033) and overall accuracy (p=0.048). Conclusions. The prediction of axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patients using combined technique has significantly higher accuracy than marking of SN with blue dye alone and therefore should be preferred. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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