Does Failure to Visualize a Sentinel Node on Preoperative Lymphoscintigraphy Predict a Greater Likelihood of Axillary Lymph Node Positivity?

Predictive factors of sentinel lymph node failed mapping in endometrial carcinoma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

In endometrial carcinoma patients, sentinel lymph node bilateral mapping fails in 20-25% of cases, with several factors affecting the likelihood of detection. However, pooled data about predictive factors of failure are lacking. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the predictive factors of sentinel lymph node failed mapping in endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy.

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis was performed searching all studies assessing predictive factors of sentinel lymph node failed mapping in apparent uterine-confined endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy through the cervical injection of indocyanine green. The associations between sentinel lymph node failed mapping and predictive factors of failure were assessed, calculating the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Six studies with a total of 1345 patients were included. Compared with patients with sentinel lymph node bilateral successful mapping, patients with sentinel lymph node failed mapping showed: OR 1.39 (p=0.41) for body mass index >30 kg/m²; OR 1.72 (p=0.24) for menopausal status; OR 1.19 (p=0.74) for adenomyosis; OR 0.86 (p=0.55) for prior pelvic surgery; OR 2.38 (p=0.26) for prior cervical surgery; OR 0.96 (p=0.89) for prior Cesarean section; OR 1.39 (p=0.70) for lysis of adhesions during surgery before sentinel lymph node biopsy; OR 1.77 (p=0.02) for indocyanine green dose <3 mL; OR 1.28 (p=0.31) for deep myometrial invasion; OR 1.21 (p=0.42) for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade 3; OR 1.89 (p=0.01) for FIGO stages III-IV; OR 1.62 (p=0.07) for non-endometrioid histotype; OR 1.29 (p=0.25) for lymph-vascular space invasion; OR 4.11 (p<0.0001) for enlarged lymph nodes; and OR 1.71 (p=0.022) for lymph node involvement.

CONCLUSION

Indocyanine green dose <3 mL, FIGO stage III-IV, enlarged lymph nodes, and lymph node involvement are predictive factors of sentinel lymph node failed mapping in endometrial cancer patients.

Anatomical breast imaging-derived parameters do not provide incremental information in prediction of nonvisualization of sentinel lymph nodes on lymphoscintigraphy

OBJECTIVE

Accurate sentinel lymph node (SLN) staging is essential for both prognosis and treatment in patients with breast cancer. However, the preoperative lymphoscintigraphy may fail to visualize the SLN. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate whether parameters derived from anatomical breast imaging can predict SLN nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, all data of mammography, breast MRI, and lymphoscintigraphy of SLN procedures from January 2016 to April 2021 were collected and reviewed from the Amsterdam UMC database.

RESULTS

A total of 758 breast cancer patients were included in this study. SLN nonvisualization on planar lymphoscintigraphy at 2-h postinjection (pi) was 29.7% and was reduced after a second injection to 7.5% at late lymphoscintigraphy 4-h pi. Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥ 70 years ( P = 0.019; OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.10-3.01), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ( P = 0.031; OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.04-2.43), and nonpalpable tumors ( P = 0.034; OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.03-2.04) were independent predictors of SLN nonvisualization. Differences in tumor size, Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System classification, or breast density were not significantly associated with SLN nonvisualization.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that, by using a multivariable analysis, risk factors for SLN nonvisualization in breast cancer patients during preoperative lymphoscintigraphy at 2-h pi are age ≥ 70 years, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 , and nonpalpable tumors. Parameters derived from mammography or breast MRI, however, are not useful to predict SLN nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy.

Does failed mapping predict sentinel lymph node metastasis in cN0 breast cancer?

Aims: The clinical significance of nonvisualized sentinel lymph nodes (non-vSLNs) is unknown. The authors sought to determine the incidence of non-vSLNs on lymphoscintigraphy, the identification rate during surgery, factors associated with non-vSLNs and related axillary management. Patients & methods: A total of 30,508 consecutive SLN procedures performed at a single institution from 2000 to 2017 were retrospectively studied. Associations between clinicopathological factors and the identification of SLNs during surgery were assessed. Results: Non-vSLN occurred in 525 of the procedures (1.7%). In 73.3%, at least one SLN was identified intraoperatively. Nodal involvement was only significantly associated with SLN nonidentification (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients with non-vSLN had an increased risk for SLN metastasis. The detection rate during surgery was consistent, reducing the amount of unnecessary axillary dissection.

Risk factors for nonvisualization of the sentinel lymph node on lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer patients

Background

Accurate sentinel lymph node (SLN) staging is essential for both prognosis and treatment in patients with breast cancer. However, the preoperative lymphoscintigraphy may fail to visualize the SLN in some patients. The purpose of this retrospective study was to identify risk factors associated with SLN nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy. For this single-center retrospective study, all data of lymphoscintigraphy of SLN procedures from March 2011 to April 2021 were collected and reviewed from the Amsterdam UMC database.

Results

A total of 1886 SLN procedures were included in this study. The SLN nonvisualization rate was 25.1% on lymphoscintigraphy at 4 h post-injection. The SLN nonvisualization rate decreased to 9.4% after reinjection. Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥ 70 years (P < 0.001; OR: 2.27; 95% CI: 1.46–3.53), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² (P = 0.031; OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.04–2.12) and nonpalpable tumors (P = 0.004; OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.15–2.07) were independent predictors of SLN nonvisualization. Tumor location, brand of radiopharmaceutical, injected dose and volume, experience of preparer and administrator were not associated with SLN nonvisualization. None of the patient, tumor or tracer characteristics were associated with SLN nonvisualization after radiotracer reinjection.

Conclusions

This study shows that risk factors for SLN nonvisualization in breast cancer patients during preoperative lymphoscintigraphy are age ≥ 70 years, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² and nonpalpable tumors. Our results support the notion that SLN lymphoscintigraphy is a very robust technique that does not depend on the experience of the preparer or administrator of the radiotracer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13550-021-00793-8.

Optimal imaging time for Tc-99m phytate lymphoscintigraphy for sentinel lymph node mapping in patients with breast cancer

Objectives:

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) sampling has become a standard practice in managing early-stage breast cancer. Lymphoscintigraphy is one of the major methods used. The radioactive tracer used in Taiwan is Tc-99m phytate. However, this agent is not commonly used around the world and the optimal imaging time has not been studied. Thus, we investigated the optimal imaging time of Tc-99m phytate lymphoscintigraphy for SLN mapping in patients with breast cancer.

Materials and Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed SLN Tc-99m phytate lymphoscintigraphies in 135 patients with breast cancer between August 2013 and November 2017. The time for the first SLN to be visualized after radiotracer injection was recorded to determine the optimal imaging time. If no SLN was identified on imaging, the scan was continued to 60 min. We also recorded the presurgical technical and clinical factors to analyze the risk factors for nonvisualization of SLN. Each patient's postoperative axillary lymph node status was also recorded.

Results:

Axillary SLNs were identified on imaging in 94.8% of the patients. All first SLNs presented within 30 min. In 6 of 7 patients with negative imaging, SLNs were identified during surgery using either blue dye or a hand-held gamma probe. Nonvisualization of SLNs on lymphoscintigraphy was significantly associated with a lower injection dose (1.0 mCi vs. 2.0 mCi), 4-injection protocol (compared to 2-injection), and injection around an outer upper quadrant tumor. In addition, patients with axillary lymph node metastasis had a higher percentage of SLN image mapping failure, with a marginally significant difference.

Conclusion:

Based on our study, 30 min after Tc-99m phytate injection is the optimal time for lymphoscintigraphy and delayed imaging beyond 30 min is not necessary. In addition, a lower injection dose, the 4-injection method, and an injection near the outer upper quadrant tumor should be avoided to minimize nonvisualization of SLNs.

Predictive risk factors for sentinel lymph node nonvisualization on planar lymphoscintigraphy using an intratumoral injection in patients with primary breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Lymphoscintigraphy is considered a useful tool to optimize sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification. Nonvisualization of the SLN is associated with a lower SLN identification rate. The aim of this study was to identify preoperative factors associated with SLN nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 2050 consecutive SLN procedures were evaluated from clinically node-negative breast cancer patients. Planar lymphoscintigraphy was performed at 3 h after an intratumoral injection of technetium-99m-nanocolloid. This technique was used for extra-axillary SLN identification. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were analyzed for association with SLN nonvisualization. Factors with a P-value less than 0.1 in univariate analysis were included in a multivariate logistic regression model.

RESULTS

The SLN visualization rate was 86.7%. In multivariate logistic regression, age of at least 70 years [odds ratio (OR): 3.24; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.14-4.91)], BMI of at least 30 (OR: 1.93; 95% CI: 1.39-2.69), T3/T4-tumors (OR: 2.70; 95% CI: 1.37-5.32), medially/centrally located tumors (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.17-1.99), previous mantle field radiation (OR: 4.04; 95% CI: 1.74-9.35), nonpalpable tumors (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.36-2.60), and presence of iodine seeds (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.02-1.78) were associated significantly with nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy. Nonvisualization was the strongest independent predictor of unsuccessful intraoperative SLN identification (P<0.001). Overall, the SLN identification rate was 97.7% because of the use of additional imaging and blue dye.

CONCLUSION

This study reports new tumor and treatment-related risk factors for nonvisualization on lymphoscintigraphy by using an intratumoral injection in primary breast cancer. We recommend a periareolar subcutaneous injection to improve SLN visualization in patients with limited prognostic and therapeutic relevance of internal mammary chain SLN identification.

Non-visualized sentinel nodes in breast cancer patients; prevalence, risk factors, and prognosis

BACKGROUND

Evidence and consensus is lacking in international guidelines regarding axillary treatment recommendations for patients in whom a sentinel lymph node (SLN) cannot be visualized (non-vSLN) during the sentinel node procedure. In this study we aimed to determine the prevalence of non-vSLNs in a Dutch population of breast cancer patients and to examine predictors and survival rate for non-vSLN.

METHODS

A nationwide, retrospective, population-based study was performed including 116,920 patients with invasive breast cancer who underwent a SLN procedure in the Netherlands between January 2005 and December 2013.

RESULTS

Of the 76,472 clinically negative patients who underwent a SLN procedure, 1924 patients (2.5%) had a non-vSLN, of whom 1552 (80.7%) underwent an ALND. Multivariate analysis showed predictive factors for non-vSLN: older age (p < 0.001), diagnosis in the period 2005-2009 (p < 0.001), larger tumor size (p = 0.003), and extensive nodal involvement (p < 0.001). Multivariate survival analysis showed a significantly worse survival (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.34, p = 0.015) for non-vSLNs patients. However, in the non-vSLN group, an ALND was not statistically significantly associated with a better survival (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.53-1.75, p = 0.891).

CONCLUSION

Patients with non-vSLNs had less favorable disease characteristics and a worse survival compared to patients with a visualized SLN. Performing an ALND was not associated with a significantly better survival in patients with non-vSLNs. However, further research on the necessity of axillary treatment in this specific patient group is required.

Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer: comparison of fluorescence dye with traditional radiocolloid and blue

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in endometrial cancer (EMCA) is rapidly gaining acceptance in the clinical community. As compared to a full lymphadenectomy in every patient, to a selective lymphadenectomy after frozen section of uterus in selected patients with intrauterine risk factors or to a strategy in which a lymphadenectomy is always omitted, SLN mapping seems to be a reasonable and oncologically safe middle ground. Various protocols can be used when applying an SLN mapping. In this manuscript we review the characteristics, toxicity and clinical impact of technetium-99m radiocolloid (Tc-99m), of the blue dyes (methylene blue, isosulfan blue and patent blue) and of indocyanine green (ICG). ICG has an excellent toxicity profile, has higher overall and bilateral detection rates as compared to blue dyes and higher bilateral detection rates as compared to a combination of Tc-99m and blue dye. The detrimental effect of BMI on the detection rates is attenuated when ICG is used as a tracer. The ease of use of the ICG SLN mapping is perceived by the patients as a better quality of care delivered. Whenever possible, ICG should be favored over the other tracers for SLN mapping in EMCA patients.

Sentinel lymph node mapping using SPECT/CT and gamma probe in endometrial cancer: an analysis of parameters affecting detection rate

PURPOSE

SPECT/CT after pericervical injection of technetium-99 m-nanocolloid was shown to be suitable for sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in endometrial cancer (EC). The aim of this study was to analyze factors affecting successful SLN detection by means of SPECT/CT such as imaging findings, patient characteristics and tumor biology in a large cohort of patients.

METHODS

One hundred and forty-five consecutive patients suffering from EC who received pre-surgical SLN mapping at our institution between 2011 and 2016 were included in this analysis. SPECT/CT data of abdomen and pelvis (mean 4:20 ± 1:20 h p.i.) were acquired after pericervical injection of technetium-99 m-nanocolloid (mean 230 ± 45 MBq) in all patients. Surgical staging was performed on the day after. Acquisition parameters, patient characteristics, SPECT/CT findings as well as histopathological results were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 282 SLNs were identified by means of SPECT/CT. Overall, preoperative and intraoperative SLN detection rates were 86%, 76% and 74% respectively. The most important factor associated with failure to detect SLNs was the presence of high bone marrow on SPECT/CT (p = 0.005). Peritoneal/abdominal radioactivity was also associated with missed SLN detection in SPECT/CT (p = 0.02). However, the presence of liver/spleen uptake on its own was not predictive for detection failure. Low numbers of detected SLNs in SPECT/CT were slightly related with older age and lower injected activity. No significant influence was found for the parameters of tumor histology and stage, lymph node involvement and the time gap between injection and imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Venous drainage as indicated by bone marrow uptake is the most important factor associated with scintigraphic SLN detection failure. Moreover, high peritoneal and abdominal activity was also associated with detection failure. Thus, meticulous application of the radiotracer is crucial in EC.

What to Do with Non-visualized Sentinel Nodes? A Dutch Nationwide Survey Study

Introduction

International guidelines differ regarding their recommendations on axillary treatment of patients with non-visualized sentinel lymph nodes (non-vSLN). Therefore, we distributed a survey among Dutch oncological surgeons to determine their routine practice and opinion regarding axillary treatment in case of a non-vSLN, with the emphasis on whether these practices and opinions have changed since publication of the Z0011 trial.

Methods

A Dutch nationwide survey containing 10 questions regarding clinical routine during the sentinel node procedure and axillary treatment of non-vSLN patients was distributed among 510 oncological surgeons.

Results

The survey was completed by 122 (24%) oncological surgeons, of whom 116 (95%) were registered as specialized breast surgeons. These surgeons had, on average, 13 years of experience. The majority of respondents used both lymphoscintigraphy and Patent Blue during the sentinel node procedure, and 39% estimated the prevalence of a non-vSLN to be 1–2%. Most surgeons are currently more reserved when considering whether to perform an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) than prior to publication of the Z0011 trial (15 vs. 80%, respectively). Sixty percent base their decision on various clinicopathological characteristics. Twenty-three respondents (20%) opted for an alternative axillary treatment.

Conclusion

This study shows that, in daily practice, most specialized breast surgeons think that a non-vSLN is rare. If so, most currently opt not to perform an ALND, whereas a small proportion consider an alternative axillary treatment. These decisions differ than in the period prior to the Z0011 trial. More research is needed to provide optimal treatment recommendations in case of a non-vSLN.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1245/s10434-017-5824-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Factors associated with successful bilateral sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

As our understanding of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping for endometrial cancer (EC) evolves, tailoring the technique to individual patients at high risk for failed mapping may result in a higher rate of successful bilateral mapping (SBM). The study objective is to identify patient, tumor, and surgeon factors associated with successful SBM in patients with EC and complex atypical hyperplasia (CAH).

METHODS

From September 2012 to November 2014, women with EC or CAH underwent SLN mapping via cervical injection followed by robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy (RA-TLH) at a tertiary care academic center. Completion lymphadenectomy and ultrastaging were performed according to an institutional protocol. Patient demographics, tumor and surgeon/intraoperative variables were prospectively collected and analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed evaluating factors known or hypothesized to impact the rate of successful lymphatic mapping.

RESULTS

RA-TLH and SLN mapping was performed in 111 women; 93 had EC and 18 had CAH. Eighty women had low grade and 31 had high grade disease. Overall, at least one SLN was identified in 85.6% of patients with SBM in 62.2% of patients. Dye choice (indocyanine green versus isosulfan blue), odds ratio (OR: 4.5), body mass index (OR: 0.95), and clinically enlarged lymph nodes (OR: 0.24) were associated with SBM rate on multivariate analyses. The use of indocyanine green dye was particularly beneficial in patients with a body mass index greater than 30.

CONCLUSION

Injection dye, BMI, and clinically enlarged lymph nodes are important considerations when performing sentinel lymph node mapping for EC.

Breast cancer lymphoscintigraphy: Factors associated with sentinel lymph node non visualization

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate factors associated with non identification of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) in lymphoscintigraphy of breast cancer patients and analyze the relationship with SLN metastases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single-center, cross-sectional and retrospective study was performed. Forty patients with lymphoscintigraphy without sentinel lymph node identification (negative lymphoscintigraphy - NL) were enrolled. The control group included 184 patients with SLN identification (positive lymphoscintigraphy - PL). Evaluated factors were age, body mass index (BMI), tumor size, histology, localization, preoperative breast lesion hookwire (harpoon) marking and SLN metastases. The statistical analysis was performed with uni- and multivariate logistic regression models and matched-pairs analysis.

RESULTS

Age (p=0.036) or having BMI (p=0.047) were the only factors significantly associated with NL. Being ≥60 years with a BMI ≥30 increased the odds of having a NL 2 and 3.8 times, respectively. Marking with hookwire seems to increase the likelihood of NL, but demonstrated statistical significance is lacking (p=0.087). The other tested variables did not affect the examination result. When controlling for age, BMI and marking with the harpoon, a significant association between lymph node metastization and NL was not found (p=0.565).

CONCLUSIONS

The most important factors related with non identification of SLN in the patients were age, BMI and marking with hook wire. However, only the first two had statistical importance. When these variables were controlled, no association was found between NL and axillary metastases.

Discordance between number of scintigraphic and perioperatively identified sentinel lymph nodes and axillary tumour recurrence

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer, sentinel node biopsy is considered the standard method to assess the lymph node status of the axilla. Preoperative identification of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) is performed by injecting a radioactive tracer, followed by lymphoscintigraphy. In some patients there is a discrepancy between the number of lymphoscintigraphically identified sentinel nodes and the number of nodes found during surgery. We hypothesized that the inability to find peroperatively all the lymphoscintigraphically identified sentinel nodes, might lead to an increase in axillary recurrence because of positive SLNs not being removed.

METHODS

Patients who underwent sentinel node biopsy between January 2000 and July 2010 were identified from a prospectively collected database. The number of lymphoscintigraphically and peroperatively identified sentinel nodes were reviewed and compared. Axillary recurrences were scored.

RESULTS

1368 patients underwent a SLN biopsy. Median follow up was 58.5 months (range 12-157). Patient and tumour characteristics showed no significant differences. In 139 patients (10.2%) the number of radioactive nodes found during surgery was less than preoperative scanning (group 1) and in 89.8% (N = 1229) there were equal or more peroperative nodes identified than seen lymphoscintigraphically (group 2). In group 1, 0/139 patients (0%) developed an axillary recurrence and in the second group this was 25/1229 (2.0%) respectively. No significant difference between groups regarding axillary recurrence, sentinel node status and distant metastasis was found.

CONCLUSION

Axillary recurrence rate is not influenced by the inability to remove all sentinel nodes during surgery that have been identified preoperatively by scintigraphy.

Value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer surgery with simple pathology facilities--an Iranian local experience with a review of potential causes of false negative results

INTRODUCTION

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a precise procedure for lymphatic staging in early breast cancer. In a valid SLNB procedure, axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be omitted in node- negative cases without compromising patient safety. In this study, detection rate, accuracy and false negative rate of SLNB for breast cancer was evaluated in a setting with simple modified conventional pathology facilities without any serial sectioning or immunohistochemistry.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Patients with confirmed breast cancer were enrolled in the study. SLNB and ALND were performed in all cases. Lymph node metastasis was evaluated in SLN and in nodes removed by ALND to determine the false negative rate. Pathologic assessment was carried out only by modified conventional technique with only 3 sections. Detection rate was determined either by lymphoscintigraphy or during surgery.

RESULTS

78 patients with 79 breast units were evaluated. SLN was detected in 75 of 79 cases (95%) in lymphoscintigraphy and 76 of 79 cases (96%) during surgery. SLN metastases was detected in 30 of 75 (40%) cases either in SLNB and ALND groups. Accuracy of SLNB method for detecting LN metastases was 92%. False negative rate was 3 of 30 of positive cases: 10%. In 7 of 10 cases with axillary lymphadenopathy, LN metastastates was detected.

CONCLUSION

SLNB is recommended for patients with various tumor sizes without palpable lymph nodes. In modified conventional pathologic examination of SLNs, at least macrometastases and some micrometastases could be detected similar to ALND. Consequently, ALND could be omitted in node-negative cases with removal of all palpable LNs. We conclude that SLNB, as one of the most important developments in breast cancer surgery, could be expanded even in areas without sophisticated pathology facilities.

Current status of sentinel lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer

Axillary node status is the most important prognostic indicator for patients with invasive breast cancer. Sentinel lymph-node biopsy (SLNB) is widely accepted and the preferred procedure for identifying lymph-node metastasis. SLNB allows focused excision and pathological examination of the most likely axillary lymph nodes to receive tumor metastases while avoiding morbidities associated with complete axillary nodal dissection. Since its introduction in the early 1990s, the process of SLNB has undergone continual modification and refinement; however, the procedure varies between institutions and controversies remain. In this review, we examine the technical issues that influence the success of lymph node mapping, discuss the controversies, and summarize the indications and contraindications for axillary node mapping and biopsy in clinical practice.

Predictive probability of four different breast cancer nomograms for nonsentinel axillary lymph node metastasis in positive sentinel node biopsy

BACKGROUND

Although completion axillary lymph node dissection (CALND) is the gold standard for evaluating axillary status after identification of a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) in breast cancer, almost 40% to 70% of SLN-positive patients will have negative non-SLNs. To predict non-SLN metastases (NSLNM) in patients with a positive SLN biopsy, four different nomograms have been created. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of four different nomograms in our SLN-positive breast cancer patients.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified 319 patients who had a positive SLN biopsy and CALND at our hospital during an 8-year period. Breast cancer nomograms developed by Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Tenon Hospital, Cambridge University, and Stanford University were used to calculate the probability of NSLNM. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was calculated for each nomogram, and values greater than 0.70 were accepted as demonstrating considerable discrimination.

RESULTS

One hundred seven of 319 patients (33.5%) had positive axillary NSLNM. The mean number of SLNs was 2.01 (range, 1 to 11 nodes), and the mean number of positive SLNs was 1.44 (range, 1 to 9 nodes). The area under the curve values were 0.70, 0.69, 0.69, and 0.64 for the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Tenon, Cambridge, and Stanford models, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center nomogram was more predictive than the other nomograms, but the Cambridge model and the Tenon model reached borderline values for accurate prediction. Nomograms developed at other institutions should be used with caution when counseling patients about the risk of additional nodal disease.

Sentinel Node Mapping for Breast Cancer: The Operative Experience of a Breast Surgeon in a Rural Community

Sentinel lymph node biopsy has become an accepted procedure for staging the axilla in early stage breast cancer. Our objectives were to review our practice of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in breast cancer, to determine the impact of frozen section (FS) analysis of the SLN on patient management, and to compare our results to national data. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of our patients with breast cancer who underwent SLN mapping with or without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) between 1999 and 2006. During this period, 478 patients were treated for breast cancer, with 227 patients undergoing SLN mapping. The SLN was identified in 201 patients, with a positive SLN found in 52 patients (25.9%). There was a discrepancy between the intraoperative analysis (FS/touch prep) and final pathology in 20 patients (11.3%). Nineteen of those patients had a negative FS with positive final pathology. Six of these patients underwent completion ALND. One patient had a false-positive FS with a negative ALND. No axillary recurrences were observed. Eight patients (3.5%) developed postoperative complications. Our practice has been to use intraoperative evaluation of the SLN to reduce the number of patients requiring a secondary ALND. In our study, six patients returned to the operating room for a completion ALND. Our complication rate and axillary recurrence rates were similar to national data.