Cited 18 times in
Comparison of outcomes between the one-step and two-step sentinel lymph node mapping techniques in endometrial cancer
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 남은지 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이정윤 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김영태 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김유나 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김성훈 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김상운 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 어경진 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-28T02:31:56Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-09-28T02:31:56Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020-03 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1048-891X | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/179088 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Fluorescence image-guided sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy using a two-step mapping technique incorporates sequential injection of indocyanine green into the bilateral uterine cornus, followed by cervical injection. Outcomes were compared with the conventional cervical (one-step) method . Methods: Patients with FIGO stage I-III endometrial cancer who underwent laparoscopic or robotic staging, including SLN biopsy, from May 2014 to December 2018, were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, pre-operative imaging, SLN detection pattern, pathologic result, adjuvant, and recurrence locations were analyzed. Results: A total of 199 patients received one-step (n=123) and two-step (n=76) SLN biopsy. Para-aortic SLN were more frequently identified in the two-step group. Lower and upper para-aortic SLN were identified in 67.1% and 38.2%, respectively, in the two-step group and in 18.7% and 5.7% in the one-step group (p<0.001). The number of para-aortic SLN harvested was superior in the two-step group (p<0.001). Metastatic para-aortic SLN were found in 7.9% of the two-step group and 2.4% of the one-step group (p=0.070). In detecting nodal metastasis, the sensitivities of the one- and two-step methods were 91.7% and 100.0%, negative predictive values were 99.0% and 100.0%, false-negative rates were 8.3% and 0%, and accuracy rates were 99.1% and 100.0%, respectively. The one-step method identified only three out of eight para-aortic lymph node metastases and missed five para-aortic lymph node metastases. There was no missed para-aortic lymph node metastasis in the two-step group. Recurrence was observed in two patients (2.6%; vaginal vault and adrenal gland) in the two-step group and seven patients (5.7%) including three nodal recurrences in the one-step group (p=0.307). Discussion: Two-step SLN mapping improved the para-aortic SLN detection rate, a known pitfall of conventional cervical injection. Proper evaluation of aortic nodal status will assist in the tailoring of adjuvant and prevent undertreatment of patients with isolated para-aortic metastasis. | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | restriction | - |
dc.language | English | - |
dc.publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Adult | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Aged, 80 and over | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / therapeutic use | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Chemotherapy, Adjuvant | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Endometrial Neoplasms / drug therapy | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Endometrial Neoplasms / pathology* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Endometrial Neoplasms / radiotherapy | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Endometrial Neoplasms / surgery | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Female | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Humans | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Image-Guided Biopsy / methods | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Indocyanine Green | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Laparoscopy | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Lymph Node Excision | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Lymph Nodes / pathology | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Lymph Nodes / surgery | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Lymphatic Metastasis | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Middle Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / pathology | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Neoplasm Staging | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Optical Imaging / methods | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Perioperative Care / methods | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Radiotherapy, Adjuvant | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Robotic Surgical Procedures | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Sentinel Lymph Node / pathology* | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Sentinel Lymph Node / surgery | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy / methods* | - |
dc.title | Comparison of outcomes between the one-step and two-step sentinel lymph node mapping techniques in endometrial cancer | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine (의과대학) | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology (산부인과학교실) | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yoo-Na Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Kyung Jin Eoh | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jung-Yun Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Eun Ji Nam | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | SungHoon Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Young-Tae Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sang Wun Kim | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000962 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A01262 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04638 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00729 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A05561 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00595 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00526 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04842 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J01115 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1525-1438 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31992601 | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://ijgc.bmj.com/content/30/3/318.long | - |
dc.subject.keyword | endometrial neoplasms | - |
dc.subject.keyword | lymphatic metastasis | - |
dc.subject.keyword | neoplasm recurrence, local | - |
dc.subject.keyword | sentinel lymph node | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Nam, Eun Ji | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 남은지 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 이정윤 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김영태 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김유나 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김성훈 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김상운 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 어경진 | - |
dc.citation.volume | 30 | - |
dc.citation.number | 3 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 318 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 324 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, Vol.30(3) : 318-324, 2020-03 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.