Abstract
The promising results of various studies applying different methods of SN biopsy in heterogeneous patient subpopulations, show that sentinel lymph node biopsy is a reliable and minimally invasive method for the determination of the nodal status in breast cancer patients. While multicenter studies for the evaluation of the method’s accuracy are still ongoing, future indications and contraindications are discussed. Based on our own experience, we try to give an actual overview of the potentials and problems of sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer.
Sentinel node detection was performed in 146 patients with breast cancer stages I–III, consisting of 127pT1/2 tumors and 19pT3/4. All of them underwent standard axillary dissection after SN biopsy. Using the radionuclide method including preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and intraoperative γ. Probe detection, the detection rate varied in relation to the tumor size between 94% for tumors with a diameter <1 cm, 85% (1–3 cm), 70% (3–5 cm) and 63% (>5 cm). The accuracy of the SN-biopsy in the prediction of the nodal status varied also with tumor diameter ranging from 100% for very small tumors <1 cm), over 97% (1–3 cm) and 88% (3–5 cm), to 67% (>5 cm). In the subgroup of patients with pT1–2 tumors (n = 106), 57 patients (53%) showed true negative sentinel nodes, 38 (36%) revealed tumor cells in the H&E staining and an additional 7 patients (7%) solely in the immunohistochemical staining. 4 (4%) of these patients, all of them from the first half of the study period, underwent false-negative SN-biopsy, all of them showing lymphangiosis carcinomatosa and/or extensive infiltration of the metastatic lymph node(s).
The results presented show, that in about 50% of early breast cancer patients surgical intervention could potentially be avoided after a negative SN-biopsy, and an additional 5–10% of conventionally nodal negative patients can be found by immunohistochemical examination of the sentinel node. The SN concept is not recommended in clinically nodal positive patients or advanced disease. Potential applications include the evaluation of parasternal lymph nodes and patients with recurrent tumor. Before clinical application, quality control of the medical center and the performing surgeon have to be established potentially including the performance of about 20 procedures under supervision for each surgeon, an individual accuracy of at least 93%, and the possibility of immunohistochemical staining as well as a regular follow-up.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Barnwell JM, Arredondo MA, Kollmorgen D, Gibbs JF, Lamonica D, Carson W, Zhang P, Winston J, Edge SB... (1998) Sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer. 5(2) 126–130
Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Comans EF, van Diest PJ, Boom RP, Meijer S (1998) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: guidelines and pitfalls of lymphscintigraphy and gamma probe detection. J Am Coli Surg 186:275–283
Cody III HS, Urban JA (1995) Internal mammary lymph node status: A major prognostic factor in axillary node negative breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2:32–37
Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM, Joseph E, Shons A, Yeatman T, Ku NN, Lyman GH, Berman C, Haddad F, Reintgen DS... (1998) Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 227:645–653
Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL (1994) Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 220:391–401
Giuliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan MF, Statman R (1997) Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:2345–2350
Hill ADK, Tran KN, Akhurst T, Yeung H, Yeh SDJ, Rosen PP, Borgen PI, Cody III HS (1999) Lessons learned from 500 cases of lymphatic mapping for breast cancer. Ann Surg 229:528–535
Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, Moffat F, Klimberg VS, Shriver C, Feldman S, Kusminsky R, Gadd M, Kuhn J, Harlow S, Beitsch P (1998) The Sentinel Node in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 339(14):941–946
Lacour JL, Monique LE, Caceres E, Koszarowski T, Veronesi U (1983) Radical mastectomy versus radical mastectomy plus internal mammary dissection. Cancer 51:1941–1943
Reuhl T, Kaisers H, Markwardt J, Haensch W, Hohenberger P, Schlag PM (1998) Axillaausräumung bei klinisch nodal-negativem Mammakarzinom. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 123:583–587
Roumen RMH, Valkenburg JGM, Geuskens LM (1997) Lymphoscintigraphy and feasibility of sentinel node biopsy in 83 patients with primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 23:495–502
Schreiber RH, Pendas S, Ku NN, Reintgen DS, Shons AR, Berman C, Boulware D, Cox CE (1999) Microstaging of breast cancer patients using cytokeratin staining of the sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg Oncol 6:95–101
Uren RF, Howman-Giles RB, Thompson JF (1998) Demonstration of second-tier lymph nodes during preoperat ive Iymphscintigraphy for melanoma: Incidence varies with primary tumor site. Ann Surg Oncol 5:517–521
Veronesi U, Valagussa P (1981) Inefficacy of internal mammary nodes dissection in breast cancer surgery. Cancer 47:170–175
Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, Viale G, Zurrida S, Bedoni M, Costa A, De Cicco C, Geraghty JG, Luini A, Sachini V, Veronesi P (1997) Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet 349: 1864–1867
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schlag, P.M., Bembenek, A. (2000). Specification of Potential Indications and Contraindications of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer. In: Schlag, P.M., Veronesi, U. (eds) Lymphatic Metastasis and Sentinel Lymphonodectomy. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 157. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-57151-0_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-57151-0_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-63070-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-57151-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive