McMasters K M, Tuttle T M, Carlson D J, Brown C M, Noyes R D, Glaser R L, Vennekotter D J, Turk P S, Tate P S, Sardi A, Cerrito P B, Edwards M J
Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, J. Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA.
J Clin Oncol. 2000 Jul;18(13):2560-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.13.2560.
Previous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy for nodal staging of patients with breast cancer. However, unacceptably high false-negative rates have been reported in several studies, raising doubt about the applicability of this technique in widespread surgical practice. Controversy persists regarding the optimal technique for correctly identifying the SLN. Some investigators advocate SLN biopsy using injection of a vital blue dye, others recommend radioactive colloid, and still others recommend the use of both agents together.
A total of 806 patients were enrolled by 99 surgeons. SLN biopsy was performed by single-agent (blue dye alone or radioactive colloid alone) or dual-agent injection at the discretion of the operating surgeon. All patients underwent attempted SLN biopsy followed by completion level I/II axillary lymph node dissection to determine the false-negative rate.
There was no significant difference (86% v 90%) in the SLN identification rate among patients who underwent single- versus dual-agent injection. The false-negative rates were 11.8% and 5.8% for single- versus dual-agent injection, respectively (P <.05). Dual-agent injection resulted in a greater mean number of SLNs identified per patient (2. 1 v 1.5; P <.0001). The SLN identification rate was significantly less for patients older than 50 years as compared with that of younger patients (87.6% v 92.6%; P =.03). Upper-outer quadrant tumor location was associated with an increased likelihood of a false-negative result compared with all other locations (11.2% v 3. 9%; P <.05).
In multi-institutional practice, SLN biopsy using dual-agent injection provides optimal sensitivity for detection of nodal metastases. The acceptable SLN identification and false-negative rates associated with the dual-agent injection technique indicate that this procedure is a suitable alternative to routine axillary dissection across a wide spectrum of surgical practice and hospital environments.
既往研究已证实前哨淋巴结(SLN)活检用于乳腺癌患者淋巴结分期的可行性。然而,多项研究报道了令人难以接受的高假阴性率,这引发了对该技术在广泛外科实践中适用性的质疑。关于正确识别SLN的最佳技术仍存在争议。一些研究者主张使用活性蓝色染料注射进行SLN活检,另一些推荐放射性胶体,还有一些则建议同时使用这两种试剂。
99位外科医生共纳入806例患者。手术医生可自行决定采用单试剂(单独使用蓝色染料或放射性胶体)或双试剂注射进行SLN活检。所有患者均尝试进行SLN活检,随后完成Ⅰ/Ⅱ级腋窝淋巴结清扫以确定假阴性率。
接受单试剂与双试剂注射的患者中,SLN识别率无显著差异(86%对90%)。单试剂与双试剂注射的假阴性率分别为11.8%和5.8%(P<.05)。双试剂注射使每位患者识别出的SLN平均数量更多(2.1对1.5;P<.0001)。与年轻患者相比,50岁以上患者SLN识别率显著更低(87.6%对92.6%;P=.03)。与所有其他部位相比,肿瘤位于外上象限时假阴性结果的可能性增加(11.2%对3.9%;P<.05)。
在多机构实践中,采用双试剂注射的SLN活检对检测淋巴结转移具有最佳敏感性。双试剂注射技术所具有的可接受的SLN识别率和假阴性率表明,在广泛的外科实践和医院环境中,该方法是常规腋窝清扫的合适替代方法。