4.6 Article

Sentinel node biopsy and quality of life measures in a Chinese population

期刊

EJSO
卷 35, 期 9, 页码 921-927

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2009.01.009

关键词

Breast carcinoma; Sentinel node biopsy; Morbidity; Quality-of-life

资金

  1. Research Foundation of Sci-Tech Committee of Shanghai City [54119524]
  2. Foundation of Education Committee of Shanghai City [05SG04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become an alternative procedure of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) with a lower risk of significant operative morbidity. The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the morbidity and quality-of-life (QoL) after SLNB or ALND. The second aim was to analyze whether the number of SLNs removed was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative morbidity. Methods: From Apr-2006 to Aug-2007, 140 patients treated with SLNB and 81 patients treated with ALND were enrolled in the study. Patients' data were collected preoperatively and at 1, 6, and 12 months after operation. Measurement of arm volume and shoulder function, evaluation of subjective sensory abnormality of both arms and chest wall were performed at every follow-up visit. Besides, patients were required to fill out the simplified Chinese version of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-breast questionnaire at 12 months after operation. Results: Patients treated with SLNB suffered less morbidity compared with ALND. Elevated body mass index and ALND procedure were independent risk factors associated with postoperative lymphedema. Moreover, patients treated with wide local excision or SLNB had better QoL compared with those treated with mastectomy or ALND. No relationship was observed between the number of SLNs and the morbidity or QoL. Conclusion: SLNB is associated with a better QoL and less morbidity compared with ALND regardless of the number of SLNs in Chinese women with breast cancer. To limit the number of SLNs less than five did not show any evidence to reduce morbidity. (C) 2009 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