Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33000339›Full record

Observational studyJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2021

Sentinel lymph node mapping with indocyanine green in cervical cancer patients undergoing open radical hysterectomy: a single-institution series.

Nicolò Bizzarri, Pedone Anchora Luigi, Gabriella Ferrandina, Gian Franco Zannoni, Maria Vittoria Carbone, Camilla Fedele, Elena Teodorico, Valerio Gallotta, Salvatore Gueli Alletti, Vito Chiantera and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nicolò BizzarriUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1727-904X
Pedone Anchora LuigiUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Gabriella FerrandinaUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Gian Franco ZannoniUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Francesco Vito 1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Maria Vittoria CarboneUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Camilla FedeleUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Elena TeodoricoUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Valerio GallottaUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Salvatore Gueli AllettiUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Vito ChianteraDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, ARNAS Ospedali Civico di Cristina Benfratelli, University of Palermo, Piazza Nicola Leotta 4/A, 90127, Palermo, Italy.
Anna FagottiUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ScambiaUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy. giovanni.scambia@policlinicogemelli.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9503-9041
Francesco FanfaniUOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Dipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITAzienda di Rilievo Nazionale ed Alta Specializzazione · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the rate of bilateral sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection with indocyanine green (ICG), to evaluate the sensitivity and the negative predictive value of cervical cancer patients undergoing open radical hysterectomy; to compare open versus minimally invasive SLN biopsy performance and to assess factors related to no/unilateral SLN mapping.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with FIGO 2018 stage IA1 with lymph-vascular space involvement to IIB and IIIC1p cervical carcinoma who underwent SLN mapping with ICG followed by systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy between 05/2017 and 06/2020. Patients were divided according to surgical approach for statistical analysis.

resultsEighty-five patients met inclusion criteria. Twenty-seven (31.8%) underwent open and 58 (68.2%) underwent minimally invasive SLN mapping. No difference in any SLN mapping (laparotomy 92.6% and minimally invasive 91.4%) or in SLN bilateral detection (laparotomy 72.0% and minimally invasive 84.9%) (p = 0.850 and p = 0.222, respectively), in median number of SLNs mapped and retrieved (2 in both groups, p = 0.165) and in site of SLN mapping per hemi-pelvis (right side, p = 0273 and left side, p = 0.618) was evident between open and minimally invasive approach. Per-patient sensitivity of SLN biopsy in laparotomy was 83.3% (95% CI 35.9-99.6%) and the negative predictive value was 95.0% (95% CI 76.0-99.1%). No difference in per-patient sensitivity was noted between two approaches (p = 0.300). None of the analyzed variables was associated with no/unilateral SLN mapping.

conclusionThe use of ICG to detect SLN in cervical cancer treated with open surgery allows a bilateral detection, sensitivity and negative predictive value comparable to minimally invasive surgery with potential advantages of ICG compared to other tracers.

Indexed as

Indocyanine GreenAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesColoring AgentsFemaleHumansHysterectomyLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesSentinel Lymph NodeColoring AgentsIndocyanine GreenCervical cancerDetection rateIndocyanine greenLaparotomyMinimally invasive surgerySentinel lymph node

Identifiers

PMID33000339
PMCPMC7873085
OpenAlexW3089435826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.