Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 12, Issue 7, pp 533–538 | Cite as

The Impact of Nonvisualization of Sentinel Nodes on Lymphoscintigraphy in Breast Cancer

  • C. Rousseau
  • J. M. Classe
  • L. Campion
  • C. Curtet
  • F. Dravet
  • R. Pioud
  • C. Sagan
  • B. Bridji
  • I. Resche
Article

Abstract

Background

This study aimed at evaluating the relationship between the nonvisualization of sentinel nodes (SNs) at lymphoscintigraphy and the intraoperative detection rate, radioactive counts in vivo, and histological status of SNs.

Methods

Two hundred eighty patients with infiltrating breast carcinoma (T0, T1/T2) underwent preoperative lymphoscintigraphy before gamma probe–guided SN biopsy.

Results

The surgical identification rate with a gamma probe was 84.6% (56 of 280) in lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients and 93.2% (224 of 280) in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .05) after two subdermal periareolar injections. The average number of SNs per patient was 1.7 in lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients and 2.2 in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .01), as assessed by gamma detection. The mean age of lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients was 62 ± 10 years, versus 55 ± 13 years for lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .001). The median radioactive count in dissected SNs identified by gamma detection was 204 cps (range, 4–618 cps) in lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients, versus 606 cps (range, 43–16,928 cps) in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .001). The rate of macrometastatic SNs was 40% in lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients, versus 30% in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (not significant), whereas the size of involved SNs was 16.6 mm in lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients, versus 13.1 in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .05). The micrometastasis detection rate in SNs from lymphoscintigraphy-negative patients was 6.25%, versus 23.3% in lymphoscintigraphy-positive patients (P < .01).

Conclusions

Negative lymphoscintigraphy was observed in 20% of patients and was more frequent in elderly patients. Negative lymphoscintigraphy was predictive of a lower surgical identification rate and fewer detected SNs. These SNs had fewer micrometastases, were fairly large, and tended to harbor metastases.

Keywords

Sentinel lymph node Breast cancer Lymphoscintigraphy Probe 

References

  1. 1.
    Veronesi, U, Paganelli, G, Viale, G,  et al. 1999Sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary dissection in breast cancer: results in a large seriesJ Natl Cancer Inst9136873CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nieweg, OE, Jansen, L, Valdes Olmos, RA,  et al. 1999Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancerEur J Nucl Med26S116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jeffrey, SS, Jones, SB, Smith, K 2000Controversies in sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancerCancer Biother Radiopharm1522333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mascarel, I, Bonichon, F, Coindre, JM,  et al. 1992Prognostic significance of breast cancer axillary lymph node micrometastases assessed by two special techniques: reevaluation with longer follow-upBr J Cancer665237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brenot-Rossi, I, Houvenaeghel, G, Jacquemier, J,  et al. 2003Nonvisualization of axillary sentinel node during lymphoscintigraphy: is there a pathologic significance in breast cancer?J Nucl Med4412327PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mariani, G, Moresco, L, Viale, G,  et al. 2001Radioguided sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer surgeryJ Nucl Med421198215PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilhem, AJ, Mijnhout, GS, Franssen, EJF 1999Radiopharmaceuticals in sentinel lymph node detection—an overviewEur J Nucl Med26S3642PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maza, S, Valencia, R, Geworski, L,  et al. 2003Peritumoural versus subareolar administration of technetium-99m nanocolloid for sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer: preliminary results of a prospective intra-individual comparative studyEur J Nucl Med306516Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith, LF, Cross, MJ, Klimberg, VS 2000Subareolar injection is a better technique for sentinel lymph node biopsyAm J Surg1804348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chagpar, A, Martin, RC, Chao, C,  et al. 2004Validation of subareolar and periareolar injection techniques for breast sentinel lymph node biopsyArch Surg13961420PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mc Masters, KM, Wong, SL, Tuttle, TM,  et al. 2000Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy for breast cancer does not improve the ability to identify axillary sentinel lymph nodesAnn Surg23172431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Valdes Olmos, RA, Tanis, PJ, Hoefnagel, CA,  et al. 2001Improved sentinel node visualization in breast cancer by optimizing the colloid particle concentration and tracer dosageNucl Med Commun2257986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Birdwell, RL, Smith, KL, Betts, BJ,  et al. 2001Breast cancer: variables affecting sentinel lymph node visualization at preoperative lymphoscintigraphyRadiology2204753PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Alazraki, NP, Styblo, T, Grant, SF,  et al. 2000Sentinel node staging of early breast cancer using lymphoscintigraphy and the intraoperative gamma-detecting probeSemin Nucl Med305664PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    DeCicco, C, Cremonesi, M, Luini, A,  et al. 1998Lymphoscintigraphy and radioguided biopsy of sentinel axillary node in breast cancerJ Nucl Med3920804PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mariani, G, Erba, P, Villa, G,  et al. 2004Lymphoscintigraphic and intraoperative detection of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer patients: the nuclear medicine perspectiveJ Surg Oncol8511222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Classe, JMC, Curtet, C, Campion, L,  et al. 2003Learning curve for the detection of axillary sentinel lymph node in breast cancer implies a twofold axillary surgical procedure: prospective evaluation of the results and morbidity on a consecutive series of 200 patientsEur J Surg Oncol2942633CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Valdes Olmos, RA, Jansen, L, Hoefnagel, CA,  et al. 2000Evaluation of mammary lymphoscintigraphy by single intratumoral injection for sentinel node identificationJ Nucl Med4115006PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heuser, T, Rink, T, Weller, E,  et al. 2001Impact of axillary nodal status on sentinel node mapping in breast cancer and its relevance for technical proceedingBreast Cancer Res Treat6712532PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gajdos, C, Tartter, PI, Bleiweiss, IJ,  et al. 1999Lymphatic invasion, tumor size, and age are independent predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in women with T1 breast cancersAnn Surg472851Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cox, CE, Dupont, E, Whitehead, GF,  et al. 2002Age and body mass index may increase the chance of failure in sentinel lymph node biopsy for women with breast cancerBreast J8 8891Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krausz, Y, Ykeda, DM, Jadvar, H,  et al. 2001Non visualization of sentinel lymph node in patients with breast cancerNucl Med Commun222532CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Rousseau
    • 1
  • J. M. Classe
    • 2
  • L. Campion
    • 3
  • C. Curtet
    • 1
  • F. Dravet
    • 2
  • R. Pioud
    • 2
  • C. Sagan
    • 4
  • B. Bridji
    • 1
  • I. Resche
    • 1
  1. 1.Service of Nuclear MedicineRené Gauducheau Cancer Center Nantes-Saint HerblainSaint Herblain CedexFrance
  2. 2.Service of SurgeryRené Gauducheau Cancer Center Nantes-Saint HerblainSaint Herblain CedexFrance
  3. 3.Service of StatisticsRené Gauducheau Cancer Center Nantes-Saint HerblainSaint Herblain CedexFrance
  4. 4.Service of PathologyRené Gauducheau Cancer Center Nantes-Saint HerblainSaint Herblain CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations