Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20812233›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of surgery2011

Intraoperative assessment of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer.

D M Layfield, A Agrawal, H Roche, R I Cutress

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of surgery, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Virtual histology imaging of lymph nodesCancer biology & medicine · 2026
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

D M LayfieldSouthampton Breast Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospitals Trust, Southampton, UK.
A Agrawal
H Roche
R I Cutress
Southampton Hospital · USPortsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust · GBSouthampton General Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) reduces the morbidity of axillary clearance and is the standard of care for patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer. The ability to analyse the sentinel node during surgery enables a decision to be made whether to proceed to full axillary clearance during primary surgery, thus avoiding a second procedure in node-positive patients.

methodsCurrent evidence for intraoperative sentinel node analysis following SLNB in breast cancer was reviewed and evaluated, based on articles obtained from a MEDLINE search using the terms 'sentinel node', 'intra-operative' and 'breast cancer'. RESULTS AND

conclusionCurrent methods for evaluating the sentinel node during surgery include cytological and histological techniques. Newer quantitative molecular assays have been the subject of much recent clinical research. Pathological techniques of intraoperative SLNB analysis such as touch imprint cytology and frozen section have a high specificity, but a lower and more variably reported sensitivity. Molecular techniques are potentially able to sample a greater proportion of the sentinel node, and could have higher sensitivity.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleForecastingFrozen SectionsHumansIntraoperative CareLymphatic MetastasisNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionSentinel Lymph Node Biopsy

Identifiers

PMID20812233
PMCPMC11440002
OpenAlexW2060369328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.