Surgery · 1999
Learning sentinel node biopsy: results of a prospective randomized trial of two techniques.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morrow M, Rademaker A W, Bethke K P, Talamonti M S, Dawes L G, Clauson J, Hansen N
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that sentinel node (SN) biopsy can accurately predict axillary nodal status. Debate exists as to the optimal method of SN identification.
METHODS: Patients with clinical T1 or T2 tumors and negative axillae were randomized to SN localization with blue dye (B) alone (n = 50) or blue dye plus radioactivity (B+R) (n = 42). Patients undergoing needle localization (n = 47) were assigned to blue dye.
RESULTS: The SN was identified in 110 patients (79%) and contained metastases in 28. The SN predicted the axillary nodal status in 96% of cases. The SN identification rate did not differ between B (88%) or B+R (86%) but was significantly lower in patients requiring localization (64%). The time to SN identification also did not differ between B and B+R. The number of cases done by an individual surgeon was a significant predictor of SN identification. A stepwise logistic regression analysis of factors influencing the success of SN identification identified tumor location, needle localization, number of operations, and body mass index as significant predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not identify any advantage for the use of the more expensive and complex method of SN identification using B+R compared with B alone, even for surgeons learning the techniques.
METHODS: Patients with clinical T1 or T2 tumors and negative axillae were randomized to SN localization with blue dye (B) alone (n = 50) or blue dye plus radioactivity (B+R) (n = 42). Patients undergoing needle localization (n = 47) were assigned to blue dye.
RESULTS: The SN was identified in 110 patients (79%) and contained metastases in 28. The SN predicted the axillary nodal status in 96% of cases. The SN identification rate did not differ between B (88%) or B+R (86%) but was significantly lower in patients requiring localization (64%). The time to SN identification also did not differ between B and B+R. The number of cases done by an individual surgeon was a significant predictor of SN identification. A stepwise logistic regression analysis of factors influencing the success of SN identification identified tumor location, needle localization, number of operations, and body mass index as significant predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not identify any advantage for the use of the more expensive and complex method of SN identification using B+R compared with B alone, even for surgeons learning the techniques.