Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Identifieur interne : 000F85 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000F84; suivant : 000F86Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Auteurs : Brian J. O Ea Md Facs ; Arnold D. K Hill Mch Frcsi ; Ayda M. El-Shirbiny Md ; Samuel D. J Yeh Md ; Paul Peter Rosen Md ; Daniel G. Coit Md Facs ; Patrick I. Borgen Md ; Hiram S. Cody Iii Md FacsSource :
- Journal of the American College of Surgeons [ 1072-7515 ] ; 1998.
Abstract
Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes. Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%). Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title><author><name sortKey="O Ea Md Facs, Brian J" sort="O Ea Md Facs, Brian J" uniqKey="O Ea Md Facs B" first="Brian J" last="O Ea Md Facs">Brian J. O Ea Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hill Mch Frcsi, Arnold D K" sort="Hill Mch Frcsi, Arnold D K" uniqKey="Hill Mch Frcsi A" first="Arnold D. K" last="Hill Mch Frcsi">Arnold D. K Hill Mch Frcsi</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="El Shirbiny Md, Ayda M" sort="El Shirbiny Md, Ayda M" uniqKey="El Shirbiny Md A" first="Ayda M" last="El-Shirbiny Md">Ayda M. El-Shirbiny Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Yeh Md, Samuel D J" sort="Yeh Md, Samuel D J" uniqKey="Yeh Md S" first="Samuel D. J" last="Yeh Md">Samuel D. J Yeh Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Rosen Md, Paul Peter" sort="Rosen Md, Paul Peter" uniqKey="Rosen Md P" first="Paul Peter" last="Rosen Md">Paul Peter Rosen Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Coit Md Facs, Daniel G" sort="Coit Md Facs, Daniel G" uniqKey="Coit Md Facs D" first="Daniel G" last="Coit Md Facs">Daniel G. Coit Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Borgen Md, Patrick I" sort="Borgen Md, Patrick I" uniqKey="Borgen Md P" first="Patrick I" last="Borgen Md">Patrick I. Borgen Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Cody Iii Md Facs, Hiram S" sort="Cody Iii Md Facs, Hiram S" uniqKey="Cody Iii Md Facs H" first="Hiram S" last="Cody Iii Md Facs">Hiram S. Cody Iii Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97</idno><date when="1998" year="1998">1998</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000F85</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000F85</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title><author><name sortKey="O Ea Md Facs, Brian J" sort="O Ea Md Facs, Brian J" uniqKey="O Ea Md Facs B" first="Brian J" last="O Ea Md Facs">Brian J. O Ea Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hill Mch Frcsi, Arnold D K" sort="Hill Mch Frcsi, Arnold D K" uniqKey="Hill Mch Frcsi A" first="Arnold D. K" last="Hill Mch Frcsi">Arnold D. K Hill Mch Frcsi</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="El Shirbiny Md, Ayda M" sort="El Shirbiny Md, Ayda M" uniqKey="El Shirbiny Md A" first="Ayda M" last="El-Shirbiny Md">Ayda M. El-Shirbiny Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Yeh Md, Samuel D J" sort="Yeh Md, Samuel D J" uniqKey="Yeh Md S" first="Samuel D. J" last="Yeh Md">Samuel D. J Yeh Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Rosen Md, Paul Peter" sort="Rosen Md, Paul Peter" uniqKey="Rosen Md P" first="Paul Peter" last="Rosen Md">Paul Peter Rosen Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Coit Md Facs, Daniel G" sort="Coit Md Facs, Daniel G" uniqKey="Coit Md Facs D" first="Daniel G" last="Coit Md Facs">Daniel G. Coit Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Borgen Md, Patrick I" sort="Borgen Md, Patrick I" uniqKey="Borgen Md P" first="Patrick I" last="Borgen Md">Patrick I. Borgen Md</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Cody Iii Md Facs, Hiram S" sort="Cody Iii Md Facs, Hiram S" uniqKey="Cody Iii Md Facs H" first="Hiram S" last="Cody Iii Md Facs">Hiram S. Cody Iii Md Facs</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Journal of the American College of Surgeons</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">ACS</title><idno type="ISSN">1072-7515</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1998">1998</date><biblScope unit="volume">186</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="423">423</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="427">427</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1072-7515</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1072-7515</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes. Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%). Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>node</json:string><json:string>axillary</json:string><json:string>breast cancer</json:string><json:string>sentinel node</json:string><json:string>radioisotope</json:string><json:string>sentinel</json:string><json:string>lymphatic</json:string><json:string>sentinel node biopsy</json:string><json:string>surg</json:string><json:string>sentinel nodes</json:string><json:string>isotope</json:string><json:string>quadrant</json:string><json:string>lymphatic mapping</json:string><json:string>standard axillary dissection</json:string><json:string>biopsy</json:string><json:string>axillary nodes</json:string><json:string>sentinel lymph node biopsy</json:string><json:string>memorial cancer center</json:string><json:string>gamma probe</json:string><json:string>axillary dissection</json:string><json:string>lymph</json:string><json:string>dissection</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Brian J O’Hea, MD, FACS</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Arnold D.K Hill, MCh, FRCSI</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Ayda M El-Shirbiny, MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Samuel D.J Yeh, MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Paul Peter Rosen, MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Daniel G Coit, MD, FACS</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Patrick I Borgen, MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Hiram S Cody, III, MD, FACS</name><affiliations><json:string>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Original Scientific Articles</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes. Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%). Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>4.937</score><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>612 x 792 pts (letter)</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>1</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1408</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>2297</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>15361</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>5</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>220</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title><pii><json:string>S1072-7515(98)00060-X</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>Journal of the American College of Surgeons</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><publicationDate>1998</publicationDate><issn><json:string>1072-7515</json:string></issn><pii><json:string>S1072-7515(00)X0003-8</json:string></pii><volume>186</volume><issue>4</issue><pages><first>423</first><last>427</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><categories><wos><json:string>science</json:string><json:string>surgery</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>surgery</json:string></scienceMetrix><inist><json:string>sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string><json:string>sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string><json:string>sciences medicales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1998</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1998</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X</json:string></doi><id>221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>©1998 Elsevier Science Inc.</p></availability><date>1998</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>This work has been supported by grants from the Tow Foundation and the Liz Claiborne Foundation.</note><note type="content">Section title: Original Articles</note><note type="content">Table 1: Patient Characteristics</note><note type="content">Table 2: Lymphoscintigraphy</note><note type="content">Table 3: Results of Sentinel Node Biopsy</note><note type="content">Table 4: Results by Tumor Size</note><note type="content">Table 5: Unsuccessful Mapping Procedures</note><note type="content">Table 6: False-Negative Procedures</note><note type="content">Table 7: Sentinel Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer: Other Series</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Brian J</forename><surname>O’Hea, MD, FACS</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Arnold D.K</forename><surname>Hill, MCh, FRCSI</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Ayda M</forename><surname>El-Shirbiny, MD</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Samuel D.J</forename><surname>Yeh, MD</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">Paul Peter</forename><surname>Rosen, MD</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0005"><persName><forename type="first">Daniel G</forename><surname>Coit, MD, FACS</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0006"><persName><forename type="first">Patrick I</forename><surname>Borgen, MD</surname></persName><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0007"><persName><forename type="first">Hiram S</forename><surname>Cody, III, MD, FACS</surname></persName><note type="biography">Hiram S. Cody III, MD, The Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021.</note><affiliation>Hiram S. Cody III, MD, The Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021.</affiliation><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X</idno><idno type="PII">S1072-7515(98)00060-X</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Journal of the American College of Surgeons</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">ACS</title><idno type="pISSN">1072-7515</idno><idno type="PII">S1072-7515(00)X0003-8</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1998"></date><biblScope unit="volume">186</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="423">423</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="427">427</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1998</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes. Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%). Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>article-category</head><item><term>Original Scientific Articles</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1998">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier, elements deleted: ce:floats; body; tail"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//ES//DTD journal article DTD version 4.5.2//EN//XML" URI="art452.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><converted-article version="4.5.2" docsubtype="fla" xml:lang="en"><item-info><jid>ACS</jid><aid>211</aid><ce:pii>S1072-7515(98)00060-X</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X</ce:doi><ce:copyright year="1998" type="full-transfer">Elsevier Science Inc.</ce:copyright><ce:doctopics><ce:doctopic><ce:text>Original Scientific Articles</ce:text></ce:doctopic></ce:doctopics></item-info><head><ce:dochead><ce:textfn>Original Articles</ce:textfn></ce:dochead><ce:title>Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center <ce:cross-ref refid="FN1"><ce:sup>1</ce:sup></ce:cross-ref><ce:footnote id="FN1"><ce:label>1</ce:label><ce:note-para>This work has been supported by grants from the Tow Foundation and the Liz Claiborne Foundation.</ce:note-para></ce:footnote></ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>O’Hea</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Brian J</ce:given-name><ce:surname>O’Hea</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD, FACS</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Hill</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Arnold D.K</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Hill</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MCh, FRCSI</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>El-Shirbiny</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Ayda M</ce:given-name><ce:surname>El-Shirbiny</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Yeh</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Samuel D.J</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Yeh</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Rosen</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Paul Peter</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Rosen</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Coit</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Daniel G</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Coit</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD, FACS</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Borgen</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Patrick I</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Borgen</ce:surname><ce:suffix>MD</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:author><ce:indexed-name>Cody</ce:indexed-name><ce:given-name>Hiram S</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Cody</ce:surname><ce:suffix>III, MD, FACS</ce:suffix><ce:cross-ref refid="AFF1">A</ce:cross-ref><ce:cross-ref refid="CORR1">*</ce:cross-ref></ce:author><ce:affiliation id="AFF1"><ce:label>A</ce:label><ce:textfn>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation><ce:correspondence id="CORR1"><ce:label>*</ce:label><ce:text>Hiram S. Cody III, MD, The Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021.</ce:text></ce:correspondence></ce:author-group><ce:date-received day="30" month="10" year="1997"></ce:date-received><ce:date-accepted day="13" month="11" year="1997"></ce:date-accepted><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%).</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Brian J</namePart><namePart type="family">O’Hea, MD, FACS</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Arnold D.K</namePart><namePart type="family">Hill, MCh, FRCSI</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ayda M</namePart><namePart type="family">El-Shirbiny, MD</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Samuel D.J</namePart><namePart type="family">Yeh, MD</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Paul Peter</namePart><namePart type="family">Rosen, MD</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Daniel G</namePart><namePart type="family">Coit, MD, FACS</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Patrick I</namePart><namePart type="family">Borgen, MD</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Hiram S</namePart><namePart type="family">Cody, III, MD, FACS</namePart><affiliation>Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.</affiliation><description>Hiram S. Cody III, MD, The Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="Full-length article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1998</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1998</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Background: Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has emerged as a potential alternative to routine axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Study Design: From September 1995 to June 1996 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 60 patients with clinically node-negative cancer underwent SNB, which was immediately followed by standard axillary dissection. Both blue dye and radioisotope were used to identify the sentinel node. SNB was compared with standard axillary dissection for its ability to accurately reflect the final pathologic status of the axillary nodes. Results: The sentinel node was successfully identified by lymphoscintigraphy in 75% (42 of 56), by blue dye in 75% (44 of 59), by isotope in 88% (52 of 59), and by the combination of blue dye and isotope in 93% (55 of 59) of all 59 evaluable patients. Of the 55 patients in this study where sentinel nodes were identified, 20 (36%) were histologically positive. The sentinel node was falsely negative in three patients, yielding an accuracy of 95%. SNB was more accurate for T1 (98%) than for T2–T3 tumors (82%). Conclusions: Lymphatic mapping is technically feasible, reliably identifies a sentinel node in most cases, and appears more accurate for T1 tumors than for larger lesions. Blue dye and radioisotope are complementary techniques, and the overall success of the procedure is maximized when the two are used together.</abstract><note type="footnote">This work has been supported by grants from the Tow Foundation and the Liz Claiborne Foundation.</note><note type="content">Section title: Original Articles</note><note type="content">Table 1: Patient Characteristics</note><note type="content">Table 2: Lymphoscintigraphy</note><note type="content">Table 3: Results of Sentinel Node Biopsy</note><note type="content">Table 4: Results by Tumor Size</note><note type="content">Table 5: Unsuccessful Mapping Procedures</note><note type="content">Table 6: False-Negative Procedures</note><note type="content">Table 7: Sentinel Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer: Other Series</note><subject><genre>article-category</genre><topic>Original Scientific Articles</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of the American College of Surgeons</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>ACS</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199804</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">1072-7515</identifier><identifier type="PII">S1072-7515(00)X0003-8</identifier><part><date>199804</date><detail type="volume"><number>186</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>4</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue pages"><start>383</start><end>500</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>423</start><end>427</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/S1072-7515(98)00060-X</identifier><identifier type="PII">S1072-7515(98)00060-X</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©1998 Elsevier Science Inc.</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>ELSEVIER</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Elsevier Science Inc., ©1998</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sante/explor/LymphedemaV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000F85 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000F85 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Sante
|area= LymphedemaV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:221A73D6300583B7FAC940BD53837FD9A8F1EC97
|texte= Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |