Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Highest Isotope Count Does Not Predict Sentinel Node Positivity in All Breast Cancer Patients

  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Radioisotope mapping is an essential technical component of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, and most authors define isotope success by an arbitrary threshold SLN-to-background ratio. Few studies have examined the degree to which the relative level of SLN counts correlates with the presence of metastasis. Having removed the SLN with the highest counts, how far should the surgeon persist in removing additional SLN which contain much lower levels of isotope?

Methods: We performed SLN biopsy, using both radioisotope and blue dye, in 2285 consecutive patients with stage I-II breast cancer. Successful isotope localization was defined as an ex vivo SLN-to-axillary background count ratio of at least 4:1, and enhanced pathologic analysis (serial sections and immunohistochemistry) was used throughout.

Results: Among the 1566 patients with more than one SLN site identified, the SLN contained metastasis in 463 (30%). In 369 (80%) of these SLN-positive cases, the SLN with the highest count contained tumor, but in 94 (20%) it was benign. Among these 94: (1) the counts of the hottest benign SLN exceeded those of the histologically positive SLN by a ratio of at least 10:1 in 31% (29 of 94) of cases, (2) the counts of the positive SLN were < 4:1 those of the axillary background in 16% (15 of 94) of cases, and (3) blue dye failed to identify 27% of positive SLN. No optimum ratio of SLN-to-SLN or SLN-to-background counts identified the positive SLN in all cases.

Conclusion:Although the SLN with the highest counts is positive in 80% of breast cancer patients with multiple SLN, neither a relatively high isotope count nor the presence of blue dye consistently predict SLN positivity in all breast cancer patients. For maximum accuracy, SLN biopsy requires (1) the removal of all nodes containing isotope regardless of the relative magnitude of counts, (2) the concurrent use of blue dye to salvage those procedures in which isotope fails, and (3) the removal of all clinically suspicious non-SLN.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Cody HS. Clinical aspects of sentinel node biopsy. Breast Cancer Res 2001; 3: 104–8.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbank JT. Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol 1993; 2: 335–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1994; 220: 391–401.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox C, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA 1996; 276: 1818–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cody HS, Fey J, Akhurst T, et al. Complementarity of blue dye and isotope in sentinel node localization for breast cancer: Univariate and multivariate analysis of 966 procedures. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8: 13–9.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McMasters KM, Tuttle TM, Carlson DJ, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer: A suitable alternative to routine axillary dissection in multi-institutional practice when optimal technique is used. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2560–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Tafra LC, Lannin DR, Swanson MS, et al. Multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer using both technetium sulfur colloid and isosulfan blue dye. Ann Surg 2001; 233: 51–9.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bass SS, Cox CE, KuNN, Berman C, Reintgen DS. The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 189: 183–94.

    Google Scholar 

  9. O’Hea BJ, Hill ADK, El-Shirbiny A, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: Initial experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. J Am Coll Surg 1998; 186: 423–7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hill ADK, Tran KN, Akhurst T, et al. Lessons learned from 500 cases of lymphatic mapping for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1999; 229: 528–35.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cody HS, Borgen PI. State-of-the-art approaches to sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: Study design, patient selection, technique, and quality control at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Surg Oncol 1999; 8: 85–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Linehan DC, Hill ADK, Akhurst T, Tran KN, Borgen PI, Cody HS. Intradermal radiocolloid and intraparenchymal blue dye injection optimize sentinel node identification in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6: 450–4.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Linehan DC, Hill ADK, Tran KN, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: Unfiltered radioisotope is superior to filtered. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 188: 377–81.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yeung HWD, Cody HS, Turlakow A, et al. Lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel node localization in breast cancer patients: A comparison between one-day and two-day protocols. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 420–3.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Turner RR, Ollila DW, Krasne DL, Giuliano AE. Histologic validation of the sentinel lymph node hypothesis for breast carcinoma. Ann Surg 1997; 226: 271–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giuliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan M, Statman R. Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 2345–50.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary dissection in breast cancer: Results in a large series. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 368–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer - a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 941–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Galimberti V, Zurrida S, Zucali P, Luini A. Can sentinel node biopsy avoid axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients? Breast 1998; 7: 8–10.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Krag DN, Meijer SJ, Weaver DL, et al. Minimal-access surgery for staging of malignant melanoma. Arch Surg 1995; 130: 654–8.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Klimberg VS, Rubio IT, Henry R, Cowan C, Colvert M, Kourourian S. Subareolar versus peritumoral injection for location of the sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg 1999; 229: 860–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM, et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 1998; 5: 645–53.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Comans EF, van Diest PJ, Boom RP, Meijer S. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: Guidelines and pitfalls of lymphoscintigraphy and gamma probe detection. J Am Coll Surg 1998; 186: 275–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nathanson SD, Anaya P, Karvelis KC, Eck L, Havstad S. Sentinel lymph node uptake of two different technetium-labeled radiocolloids. Ann Surg Oncol 1997; 4: 104–10.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Martin RCII, Edwards MJ, Wong SL, et al. Practical guidelines for optimal gamma probe detection of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer: Results of a multi-institutional study. For the University of Louisville Breast Cancer Study Group. Surgery 2000; 128: 139–44.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McCarter MD, Yeung H, Fey J, Borgen PI, Cody HS. The breast cancer patient with multiple sentinel nodes: When to stop? J Am Coll Surg 2001; 192: 692–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Morton DL, Bostick PJ. Will the true sentinel node please stand? Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6: 12–14.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cody HS, Hill ADK, Tran KN, Brennan MF, Borgen PI. Credentialing for breast lymphatic mapping - how many cases are enough? Ann Surg 1999; 229: 723–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiram S. Cody III MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martin, R.C., Fey, J., Yeung, H. et al. Highest Isotope Count Does Not Predict Sentinel Node Positivity in All Breast Cancer Patients. Ann Surg Oncol 8, 592–597 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0592-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0592-5

Key Words:

Navigation