Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26069857›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2015

The next evolution in radioguided surgery: breast cancer related sentinel node localization using a freehandSPECT-mobile gamma camera combination.

Thijs Engelen, Beatrice Mf Winkel, Daphne Dd Rietbergen, Gijs H KleinJan, Sergi Vidal-Sicart, Renato A Valdés Olmos, Nynke S van den Berg, Fijs Wb van Leeuwen

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Revolutionizing (robot-assisted) laparoscopic gamma tracing using a drop-in gamma probe technology.American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016
    Article
  12. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Thijs EngelenInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands ; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Beatrice Mf WinkelInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Daphne Dd RietbergenInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Gijs H KleinJanInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands ; Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sergi Vidal-SicartDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Hospital Clinic-Barcelona Villarroel 170. 08036 Barcelona, Spain.
Renato A Valdés OlmosInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands ; Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nynke S van den BergInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands ; Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fijs Wb van LeeuwenInterventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory and Nuclear Medicine section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Albinusdreef 2, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands ; Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ; Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate pre- and intraoperative identification of the sentinel node (SN) forms the basis of the SN biopsy procedure. Gamma tracing technologies such as a gamma probe (GP), a 2D mobile gamma camera (MGC) or 3D freehandSPECT (FHS) can be used to provide the surgeon with radioguidance to the SN(s). We reasoned that integrated use of these technologies results in the generation of a "hybrid" modality that combines the best that the individual radioguidance technologies have to offer. The sensitivity and resolvability of both 2D-MGC and 3D-FHS-MGC were studied in a phantom setup (at various source-detector depths and using varying injection site-to-SN distances), and in ten breast cancer patients scheduled for SN biopsy. Acquired 3D-FHS-MGC images were overlaid with the position of the phantom/patient. This augmented-reality overview image was then used for navigation to the hotspot/SN in virtual-reality using the GP. Obtained results were compared to conventional gamma camera lymphoscintigrams. Resolution of 3D-FHS-MGC allowed identification of the SNs at a minimum injection site (100 MBq)-to-node (1 MBq; 1%) distance of 20 mm, up to a source-detector depth of 36 mm in 2D-MGC and up to 24 mm in 3D-FHS-MGC. A clinically relevant dose of approximately 1 MBq was clearly detectable up to a depth of 60 mm in 2D-MGC and 48 mm in 3D-FHS-MGC. In all ten patients at least one SN was visualized on the lymphoscintigrams with a total of 12 SNs visualized. 3D-FHS-MGC identified 11 of 12 SNs and allowed navigation to all these visualized SNs; in one patient with two axillary SNs located closely to each other (11 mm), 3D-FHS-MGC was not able to distinguish the two SNs. In conclusion, high sensitivity detection of SNs at an injection site-to-node distance of 20 mm-and-up was possible using 3D-FHS-MGC. In patients, 3D-FHS-MGC showed highly reproducible images as compared to the conventional lymphoscintigrams.

Indexed as

breast cancerfreehandSPECTmobile gamma cameranavigationnuclear medicineradioguided surgerySentinel node

Identifiers

PMID26069857
PMCPMC4446392
OpenAlexW814285306

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.