Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Apr;17(4):1069-75. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0841-6. Epub 2009 Dec 1.
Lymphatic drainage patterns from the breast have been described in the past. Drainage may change after treatment of a breast or axilla, and this may have implications for lymphatic mapping. The aim of this study was to determine the lymphatic drainage patterns in breast cancer patients with a previously treated ipsilateral breast.
Between January 1999 and November 2008, 115 sentinel node procedures were performed in breast cancer patients who had undergone treatment of the ipsilateral breast in the past. Lymphatic drainage patterns were analyzed based on preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Patients were divided into subgroups according to their previous treatment.
Sentinel nodes were found in 84% of the patients: in 81 patients (70%) in the axilla, 43 patients (37%) had drainage to more than one site, and in 18 patients (16%) no drainage was detected. The percentage of drainage outside the axilla was higher than in a series of untreated breast cancer patients from our institution (51% versus 33%, P = 0.01). The 16% nonidentification rate was also higher than the 3.1% in patients without previous treatment (P = 0.003). Four patients (3.5%) had lymphatic drainage to the contralateral axilla. Twelve patients (10%) had involved sentinel nodes; these were harvested from the contralateral axilla in two of them. No lymph node recurrences were observed during a median follow-up time of 39 months.
Lymphatic mapping yields a lymph node in 84% of breast cancer patients who have undergone previous treatment of the breast. Nonidentification and extra-axillary nodes are more frequently encountered than in patients without treatment of the breast in the past. The finding of involved nodes suggests that sentinel node biopsy improves staging. Long-term follow-up will determine the sensitivity of the procedure in this specific situation.
过去曾描述过乳房的淋巴引流模式。治疗乳房或腋窝后,引流可能会发生变化,这可能对淋巴作图有影响。本研究的目的是确定既往同侧乳房治疗的乳腺癌患者的淋巴引流模式。
1999 年 1 月至 2008 年 11 月,对 115 例曾接受同侧乳房治疗的乳腺癌患者进行了前哨淋巴结活检。基于术前淋巴闪烁显像和前哨淋巴结活检分析淋巴引流模式。根据既往治疗情况将患者分为亚组。
84%的患者发现了前哨淋巴结:81 例(70%)在腋窝,43 例(37%)有多个部位引流,18 例(16%)未发现引流。腋外引流的比例高于我院未经治疗的乳腺癌患者系列(51%比 33%,P=0.01)。16%的无法识别率也高于无既往治疗的患者(3.1%,P=0.003)。4 例(3.5%)患者出现对侧腋窝淋巴引流。12 例(10%)患者前哨淋巴结受累,其中 2 例来自对侧腋窝。中位随访 39 个月期间未观察到淋巴结复发。
对既往接受过乳房治疗的乳腺癌患者进行淋巴作图,84%的患者可获得淋巴结。无法识别和腋外淋巴结比既往未治疗的患者更常见。受累淋巴结的发现表明前哨淋巴结活检可改善分期。长期随访将确定该特定情况下该方法的敏感性。