Suppr超能文献

新辅助化疗后乳腺癌患者前哨淋巴结活检:cN0 和 cN+患者头对头比较的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Sentinel lymph node mapping in breast cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis about head to head comparison of cN0 and cN + patients.

机构信息

Nuclear Medicine Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona, Switzerland.

出版信息

Breast Cancer. 2022 Jan;29(1):50-64. doi: 10.1007/s12282-021-01280-7. Epub 2021 Aug 2.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The effectiveness of sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping and biopsy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in axillary lymph node staging of breast cancer (BCa) patients with initial clinical node positive status (cN +) compared to clinical node negative status (cN0) is not yet known. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the accuracy of SLN mapping following NAC in cN + and cN0 BCa patients.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were comprehensively reviewed to retrieve all the studies that performed SLN mapping/biopsy and standard axillary lymph node dissection on cN0 and cN + BCa patients following NAC. Pooled detection and false negative rates for N0 and N + patients including 95% confidence interval values (95% CI) were evaluated. Odds ratio (OR) and risk difference (RD) of SLN detection failure and false negative results were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 27 articles were included for SLN detection rate evaluation and 17 for false negative assessment. The OR and RD of detection failure in N + group compared with N0 group following NAC were 2.22 (p = 0.00, 95% CI 1.4-3.4) and 4% (p = 0.00, 95% CI 2-6%), respectively. The OR and RD of false negative rate were 1.6 (p = 0.01, 95% CI 1-2.6) and 8% (p = 0.02, 95% CI 1-14%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

SLN mapping in BCa patients following NAC shows high risk of detection failure and high false negative rate of SLN biopsy in cN + patients. In comparison with cN0 BCa patients, SLN mapping and biopsy after NAC was associated with almost two times higher odds of detection failure and false negative results in cN + patients; therefore, this method should not be recommended in this group of patients.

摘要

目的

新辅助化疗(NAC)后前哨淋巴结(SLN)检测和活检在初始临床淋巴结阳性(cN+)与临床淋巴结阴性(cN0)乳腺癌(BCa)患者腋窝淋巴结分期中的有效性尚不清楚。本荟萃分析旨在比较 NAC 后 cN+和 cN0BCa 患者 SLN 检测的准确性。

方法

全面检索 PubMed 和 Scopus,检索所有在 NAC 后对 cN0 和 cN+BCa 患者进行 SLN 检测/活检和标准腋窝淋巴结清扫的研究。评估了 N0 和 N+患者的总体检测和假阴性率,包括 95%置信区间(95%CI)。比较两组 SLN 检测失败和假阴性结果的比值比(OR)和风险差异(RD)。

结果

共纳入 27 篇文章评估 SLN 检测率,17 篇文章评估假阴性评估。NAC 后 cN+组与 cN0 组检测失败的 OR 和 RD 分别为 2.22(p=0.00,95%CI 1.4-3.4)和 4%(p=0.00,95%CI 2-6%)。假阴性率的 OR 和 RD 分别为 1.6(p=0.01,95%CI 1-2.6)和 8%(p=0.02,95%CI 1-14%)。

结论

NAC 后 BCa 患者的 SLN 检测显示出检测失败的高风险和 SLN 活检的高假阴性率,在 cN+患者中,与 cN0BCa 患者相比,NAC 后 SLN 检测和活检的检测失败和假阴性结果的几率几乎高出两倍;因此,不建议在该组患者中使用该方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验