Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Intraoperative identification of suspicious palpable lymph nodes as an integral part of sentinel node biopsy in patients with breast cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the sensitivity and accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), the number of false negative (FN) results is still relatively high, which has prompted much investigation. We studied the effectiveness of the biopsy of suspicious palpable lymph nodes (LNs) in reducing the number of FN results.

Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 865 breast cancer patients who underwent successful SLNB at a single institution. After excising the blue-stained or radioactive nodes, all suspicious palpable LNs that were not either blue-stained or radioactive were also excised.

Results

Sampling of a suspicious palpable LN was done in 342 (39.5%) of the 865 patients. The average number of suspicious palpable nodes was 1.9. The suspicious nodes harbored metastasis in 19 of the 342 patients. Both blue-stained and radioactive metastatic SLNs were found in 8 patients, whereas the palpable nodes were the only ones involved in the other 11. LN involvement was identified solely by biopsy of a suspicious palpable LN in 11 (6.5%) of 170 patients with SLN metastasis (6.5%).

Conclusion

Biopsy of a suspicious palpable LN should be done as part of SLNB to reduce the number of FN results of SLNs in breast cancer patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, Viale G, Zurrida S, Bedoni M, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet 1997;349:1864–1867.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. O’Hea BJ, Hill AD, El-Shirbiny AM, Yeh SD, Rosen PP, Coit DG, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: initial experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:423–427.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, Goyal A, Newcombe RG, Dixon JM, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:599–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kelley MC, Hansen N, McMasters KM. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Am J Surg 2004;188:49–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Martin RC, 2nd, Chagpar A, Scoggins CR, Edwards MJ, Hagendoorn L, Stromberg AJ, et al. Clinicopathologic factors associated with false-negative sentinel lymph-node biopsy in breast cancer. Ann Surg 2005;241:1005–1012; discussion 12–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. White RL Jr, Wilke LG. Update on the NSABP and ACOSOG breast cancer sentinel node trials. Am Surg 2004;70:420–424.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Martin RC, Fey J, Yeung H, Borgen PI, Cody HS 3rd. Highest isotope count does not predict sentinel node positivity in all breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:592–597.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Tanis PJ, Nieweg OE, Merkus JW, Peterse JL, Kroon BB. False negative sentinel node procedure established through palpation of the biopsy wound. Eur J Surg Oncol 2000;26:714–715.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Carmon M, Olsha O, Rivkin L, Spira RM, Golomb E. Intraoperative palpation for clinically suspicious axillary sentinel lymph nodes reduces the false-negative rate of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Breast J 2006;12:199–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cabanas RM. An approach for the treatment of penile carcinoma. Cancer 1977;39:456–466.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm FK, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992;127:392–399.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1994;220:391–398; discussion 8–401.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bergkvist L, Frisell J. Multicentre validation study of sentinel node biopsy for staging in breast cancer. Br J Surg 2005;92:1221–1224.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Goyal A, Newcombe RG, Chhabra A, Mansel RE. Factors affecting failed localisation and false-negative rates of sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer — results of the ALMANAC validation phase. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;99:203–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nieweg OE, Estourgie SH. What is a sentinel node and what is a false-negative sentinel node? Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:169S–173S.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin RC, Derossis AM, Fey J, Yeung H, Yeh SD, Akhurst T, et al. Intradermal isotope injection is superior to intramammary in sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer. Surgery 2001;130:432–438.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Choi, Y.J., Kim, J.H., Nam, S.J. et al. Intraoperative identification of suspicious palpable lymph nodes as an integral part of sentinel node biopsy in patients with breast cancer. Surg Today 38, 390–394 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-007-3653-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-007-3653-y

Key words

Navigation