Contribution of lymphoscintigraphy to intraoperative sentinel lymph node detection in early cervical cancer: Analysis of the prospective multicenter SENTICOL cohort.

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_37D95A530B08
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Contribution of lymphoscintigraphy to intraoperative sentinel lymph node detection in early cervical cancer: Analysis of the prospective multicenter SENTICOL cohort.
Périodique
Gynecol Oncol
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Bats A. S., Frati A., Mathevet P., Orliaguet I., Querleu D., Zerdoud S., Leblanc E., Gauthier H., Uzan C., Deandreis D., Darai E., Kerrou K., Marret H., Lenain E., Froissart M., Lecuru F.
ISSN
1095-6859 (Electronic))
ISSN-L
0090-8258
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2015
Volume
137
Numéro
2
Pages
264-9
Langue
anglais
Notes
Bats, Anne-Sophie
Frati, Albane
Mathevet, Patrice
Orliaguet, Isabelle
Querleu, Denis
Zerdoud, Slimane
Leblanc, Eric
Gauthier, Helene
Uzan, Catherine
Deandreis, Desiree
Darai, Emile
Kerrou, Khaldoun
Marret, Henri
Lenain, Emilie
Froissart, Marc
Lecuru, Fabrice
eng
Clinical Trial
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
2015/03/03 06:00
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 May;137(2):264-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.02.018. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
Résumé
PURPOSE: To evaluate the contribution of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy to intraoperative lymphatic mapping (ILM) in early cervical cancer METHODS: We conducted an ancillary analysis of the multicenter prospective SENTICOL study in early cervical cancer. Radiocolloid was injected intracervically on the day before (long protocol) or morning of (short protocol) surgery, lymphoscintigraphy was performed, and the results of a centralized image review were communicated to the surgeons. ILM was performed on combined radioactivity/patent blue detection. Sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) were electively sampled before routine bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy by laparoscopy. RESULTS: Of 139 patients in the modified intention-to-diagnose analysis, 114 had centrally reviewed lymphoscintigrams, which showed 352 SLNs in 100 patients. Lymphoscintigraphy and ILM detection rates were 87.8% and 97.8%, respectively. Agreement between lymphoscintigraphy and ILM was low for the number of SLNs (kappa=0.23; -0.04; 0.49) and bilateral SLNs (kappa=0.36; 0.2; 0.52). No patient without SLNs by ILM had SLNs by lymphoscintigraphy. Lymphoscintigraphy identified substantial proportions of unusual drainage pathways. No patients with metastatic nodes had SLNs by lymphoscintigraphy but not by ILM in the relevant territory. In 1 of the 2 patients with false-negative SLN results, SLNs were bilateral by lymphoscintigraphy and unilateral by ILM. CONCLUSION: Although the detection rate was lower by lymphoscintigraphy than by ILM, the substantial proportions of SLNs in unusual territories provided valuable guidance for the surgical exploration. Awareness of the limited agreement between lymphoscintigraphic and surgical detection might help surgeons decrease the false-negative rate.
Mots-clé
Adult, Cohort Studies, Early Detection of Cancer, Female, Humans, Intraoperative Care/methods, Lymph Nodes/*pathology/surgery, Lymphatic Metastasis, Lymphoscintigraphy/*methods, Prospective Studies, Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy/*methods, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/*diagnosis/pathology/surgery, Cervical cancer, Detection, False negative, Lymphoscintigraphy, Sentinel lymph node, Unusual drainage basins
Pubmed
Création de la notice
03/03/2016 16:49
Dernière modification de la notice
21/08/2019 5:35
Données d'usage