Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study
Identifieur interne : 002A55 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 002A54; suivant : 002A56Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study
Auteurs : Sanjoy Saha ; William B. Farrar ; Michael J. Walker ; Lisa D. Yee ; Julian A. Kim ; Jenny Mosic ; William E. Burak Jr ; John Olsen ; George H. Hinkle ; Rodney V. PozderacSource :
- Current Surgery [ 0149-7944 ] ; 1999.
Abstract
Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM). Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed. Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in 23 25 (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in 17 25 (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in 6 8 patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions. Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.
Url:
DOI: 10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title><author><name sortKey="Saha, Sanjoy" sort="Saha, Sanjoy" uniqKey="Saha S" first="Sanjoy" last="Saha">Sanjoy Saha</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Farrar, William B" sort="Farrar, William B" uniqKey="Farrar W" first="William B." last="Farrar">William B. Farrar</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Walker, Michael J" sort="Walker, Michael J" uniqKey="Walker M" first="Michael J." last="Walker">Michael J. Walker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Yee, Lisa D" sort="Yee, Lisa D" uniqKey="Yee L" first="Lisa D." last="Yee">Lisa D. Yee</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kim, Julian A" sort="Kim, Julian A" uniqKey="Kim J" first="Julian A." last="Kim">Julian A. Kim</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Mosic, Jenny" sort="Mosic, Jenny" uniqKey="Mosic J" first="Jenny" last="Mosic">Jenny Mosic</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Burak Jr, William E" sort="Burak Jr, William E" uniqKey="Burak Jr W" first="William E." last="Burak Jr">William E. Burak Jr</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Olsen, John" sort="Olsen, John" uniqKey="Olsen J" first="John" last="Olsen">John Olsen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hinkle, George H" sort="Hinkle, George H" uniqKey="Hinkle G" first="George H." last="Hinkle">George H. Hinkle</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Pozderac, Rodney V" sort="Pozderac, Rodney V" uniqKey="Pozderac R" first="Rodney V." last="Pozderac">Rodney V. Pozderac</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002A55</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">002A55</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title><author><name sortKey="Saha, Sanjoy" sort="Saha, Sanjoy" uniqKey="Saha S" first="Sanjoy" last="Saha">Sanjoy Saha</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Farrar, William B" sort="Farrar, William B" uniqKey="Farrar W" first="William B." last="Farrar">William B. Farrar</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Walker, Michael J" sort="Walker, Michael J" uniqKey="Walker M" first="Michael J." last="Walker">Michael J. Walker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Yee, Lisa D" sort="Yee, Lisa D" uniqKey="Yee L" first="Lisa D." last="Yee">Lisa D. Yee</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kim, Julian A" sort="Kim, Julian A" uniqKey="Kim J" first="Julian A." last="Kim">Julian A. Kim</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Mosic, Jenny" sort="Mosic, Jenny" uniqKey="Mosic J" first="Jenny" last="Mosic">Jenny Mosic</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Burak Jr, William E" sort="Burak Jr, William E" uniqKey="Burak Jr W" first="William E." last="Burak Jr">William E. Burak Jr</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Olsen, John" sort="Olsen, John" uniqKey="Olsen J" first="John" last="Olsen">John Olsen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Hinkle, George H" sort="Hinkle, George H" uniqKey="Hinkle G" first="George H." last="Hinkle">George H. Hinkle</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Pozderac, Rodney V" sort="Pozderac, Rodney V" uniqKey="Pozderac R" first="Rodney V." last="Pozderac">Rodney V. Pozderac</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Current Surgery</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CURSUR</title><idno type="ISSN">0149-7944</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999">1999</date><biblScope unit="volume">56</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1–2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="62">62</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="66">66</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0149-7944</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0149-7944</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM). Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed. Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in 23 25 (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in 17 25 (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in 6 8 patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions. Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>elsevier</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>node</json:string><json:string>axillary</json:string><json:string>lymphatic</json:string><json:string>lymphoscintigraphy</json:string><json:string>breast cancer</json:string><json:string>melanoma</json:string><json:string>breast cancer patients</json:string><json:string>lymph</json:string><json:string>current surgery</json:string><json:string>lymphatic mapping</json:string><json:string>intraoperative lymphatic mapping</json:string><json:string>axillary lymph node dissection</json:string><json:string>localization</json:string><json:string>sentinel lymph node</json:string><json:string>negative nodes</json:string><json:string>lymph nodes</json:string><json:string>single injection</json:string><json:string>sentinel node</json:string><json:string>axillary dissection</json:string><json:string>sulfur colloid</json:string><json:string>sentinel</json:string><json:string>jenny mosic</json:string><json:string>biopsy cavity</json:string><json:string>lymphatic basin</json:string><json:string>additional information</json:string><json:string>subareolar region</json:string><json:string>preoperative lymphoscintigraphy</json:string><json:string>radical mastectomy</json:string><json:string>systemic disease</json:string><json:string>invasive breast cancer</json:string><json:string>axillary nodes</json:string><json:string>primary lesion</json:string><json:string>penile carcinoma</json:string><json:string>cutaneous melanoma</json:string><json:string>first node</json:string><json:string>primary tumor</json:string><json:string>metastatic involvement</json:string><json:string>prospective nonrandomized study</json:string><json:string>axillary incision</json:string><json:string>interstitial injection</json:string><json:string>surgical oncology</json:string><json:string>biopsy</json:string><json:string>dissection</json:string><json:string>lesion</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Sanjoy Saha MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>William B. Farrar MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Michael J. Walker MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Lisa D. Yee MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Julian A. Kim MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Jenny Mosic RN</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>William E. Burak, Jr MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>John Olsen MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>George H. Hinkle RPh, MS</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Rodney V. Pozderac MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Original research</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>Full-length article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM). Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed. Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in 23 25 (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in 17 25 (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in 6 8 patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions. Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>5.205</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>575.984 x 792.28 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>1</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>2333</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>2205</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>17330</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>5</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>369</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title><pii><json:string>S0149-7944(99)00011-2</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><serie><title>Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><volume>11</volume><pages><first>58</first></pages></serie><host><title>Current Surgery</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><issn><json:string>0149-7944</json:string></issn><pii><json:string>S0149-7944(00)X0047-5</json:string></pii><volume>56</volume><issue>1–2</issue><pages><first>62</first><last>66</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><categories><wos></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>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2</json:string></doi><id>5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><availability><p>ELSEVIER</p></availability><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content">Section title: Feature</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Sanjoy</forename><surname>Saha</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">William B.</forename><surname>Farrar</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Michael J.</forename><surname>Walker</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Lisa D.</forename><surname>Yee</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">Julian A.</forename><surname>Kim</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0005"><persName><forename type="first">Jenny</forename><surname>Mosic</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">RN</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0006"><persName><forename type="first">William E.</forename><surname>Burak, Jr</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0007"><persName><forename type="first">John</forename><surname>Olsen</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0008"><persName><forename type="first">George H.</forename><surname>Hinkle</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">RPh, MS</roleName><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0009"><persName><forename type="first">Rodney V.</forename><surname>Pozderac</surname></persName><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2</idno><idno type="PII">S0149-7944(99)00011-2</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Current Surgery</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CURSUR</title><idno type="pISSN">0149-7944</idno><idno type="PII">S0149-7944(00)X0047-5</idno><imprint><publisher>ELSEVIER</publisher><date type="published" when="1999"></date><biblScope unit="volume">56</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1–2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="62">62</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="66">66</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM). Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed. Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in 23 25 (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in 17 25 (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in 6 8 patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions. Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>article-category</head><item><term>Original research</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Elsevier, elements deleted: 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"><item-info><jid>CURSUR</jid><aid>99000112</aid><ce:pii>S0149-7944(99)00011-2</ce:pii><ce:doi>10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2</ce:doi><ce:copyright type="unknown" year="1999"></ce:copyright><ce:doctopics><ce:doctopic><ce:text>Original research</ce:text></ce:doctopic></ce:doctopics></item-info><head><ce:dochead><ce:textfn>Feature</ce:textfn></ce:dochead><ce:title>Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</ce:title><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>Sanjoy</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Saha</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>William B.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Farrar</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Michael J.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Walker</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Lisa D.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Yee</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Julian A.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Kim</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Jenny</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Mosic</ce:surname><ce:degrees>RN</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>William E.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Burak</ce:surname><ce:suffix>Jr</ce:suffix><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation></ce:author-group><ce:author-group><ce:author><ce:given-name>John</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Olsen</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>George H.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Hinkle</ce:surname><ce:degrees>RPh, MS</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:author><ce:given-name>Rodney V.</ce:given-name><ce:surname>Pozderac</ce:surname><ce:degrees>MD</ce:degrees></ce:author><ce:affiliation><ce:textfn>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</ce:textfn></ce:affiliation></ce:author-group><ce:abstract><ce:section-title>Abstract</ce:section-title><ce:abstract-sec><ce:simple-para>Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM).</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in <math altimg="si1.gif"><fr shape="sol"><nu>23</nu><de>25</de></fr></math> (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in <math altimg="si2.gif"><fr shape="sol"><nu>17</nu><de>25</de></fr></math> (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in <math altimg="si3.gif"><fr shape="sol"><nu>6</nu><de>8</de></fr></math> patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions.</ce:simple-para><ce:simple-para>Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.</ce:simple-para></ce:abstract-sec></ce:abstract></head></converted-article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Sanjoy</namePart><namePart type="family">Saha</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">William B.</namePart><namePart type="family">Farrar</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Michael J.</namePart><namePart type="family">Walker</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Lisa D.</namePart><namePart type="family">Yee</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Julian A.</namePart><namePart type="family">Kim</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Jenny</namePart><namePart type="family">Mosic</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">RN</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">William E.</namePart><namePart type="family">Burak, Jr</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery Ohio State University Medical Center Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">John</namePart><namePart type="family">Olsen</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">George H.</namePart><namePart type="family">Hinkle</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">RPh, MS</namePart><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Rodney V.</namePart><namePart type="family">Pozderac</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus, Ohio, USA</affiliation><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">1999</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</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">Purpose: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using lymphatic mapping is gaining popularity in the management of invasive breast cancer. The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the utility of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy (LS) in patients undergoing intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM). Methods: On the day of surgery, patients were injected with 400 μCi Tc-99m sulfur colloid (filtered) around the tumor or the biopsy cavity (100 μCi in each quadrant). The patients undergoing needle localization biopsy received a single injection of 400 μCi. Imaging was performed for 30 minutes and after 2 hours following the injection to trace the movement of radionuclide. A biplanar imaging technique was utilized for the localization of the sentinel node. The patients were then taken to the operating room, where ILM was performed utilizing a hand-held gamma detector probe (GDP) and isosulfan blue dye (IBD). Any sentinel nodes were identified and removed; subsequently, a standard axillary node dissection was performed. Results: One male and 24 female patients (n = 25) enrolled in and completed the study. Primary breast tumor sites were in the following quadrants: upper outer (15), lower outer (2), upper inner (3), lower inner (2), and central (3). A SLN was identified by ILM in 23 25 (92%) patients. None of the patients with a histologically negative SLN had axillary metastasis. Preoperative LS identified a suspected sentinel node (SN) in 17 25 (68%) patients. In all 17 of these patients, at least 1 SN was also identified by ILM. Intraoperative findings correlated with the LS (all axillary nodes) in all but one of these patients; ILM located an axillary SN in this patient in whom LS revealed a supraclavicular node. An axillary SLN was identified by ILM in 6 8 patients with negative LS. Furthermore, LS did not identify any drainage to internal mammary nodes, even in 8 patients with medial and central lesions. Conclusions: Although LS has value in identifying the draining lymphatic basin, negative LS does not preclude the identification of a SLN by ILM. LS does not appear to provide additional information to the surgeon performing ILM and, therefore, its routine use in breast cancer patients is not justified. However, its role in identifying internal mammary nodes needs further evaluation.</abstract><note type="content">Section title: Feature</note><subject><genre>article-category</genre><topic>Original research</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Current Surgery</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>CURSUR</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">199901</dateIssued></originInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0149-7944</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0149-7944(00)X0047-5</identifier><part><date>199901</date><detail type="volume"><number>56</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>1–2</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="issue pages"><start>1</start><end>97</end></extent><extent unit="pages"><start>62</start><end>66</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1016/S0149-7944(99)00011-2</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0149-7944(99)00011-2</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>ELSEVIER</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata></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 002A55 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002A55 | 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:5B5DECCAB37BA97F1DF1119DF89B31C4EA779762
|texte= Award winner of the resident essay contest, Ohio Chapter, American College of Surgeons Utility of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in breast cancer: A prospective study
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |