Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33937061›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Avoiding Full Lymphadenectomies in Intermediate- and High-Risk Endometrial Cancer by Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Implementation.

Virginia García Pineda, Ignacio Zapardiel, Myriam Gracia, Jaime Siegrist, María Dolores Diestro, María Alonso, Alicia Hernández

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Virginia García PinedaGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Ignacio ZapardielGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Myriam GraciaGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Jaime SiegristGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
María Dolores DiestroGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
María AlonsoGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Alicia HernándezGynecological Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario La Paz · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) to avoid staging lymphadenectomies by detecting nodal metastasis in intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer (EC).

methodsA single institutional retrospective study was performed including all patients with intermediate- and high-risk EC who underwent surgical nodal staging between January 2012 and December 2019. Patients with disseminated disease detected on imaging techniques or at the time of surgery were excluded. Patients were evaluable if they underwent nodal staging with SLNB and pelvic (PLD) and paraaortic (PALD) lymph node dissection. We analyzed the accuracy of the sentinel lymph node technique. Only patients with at least one sentinel lymph node (SLN) detected were included in the sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) analyses. The tracers used were technetium 99m, blue dye, and indocyanine green.

resultsEighty-eight patients presented intermediate- and high-risk EC (51 patients and 37 patients respectively) and underwent SLNB with consecutive PLD and PALD. The median (range) number of sentinel nodes retrieved was 2.9 (0-11). The global detection rate of SLN was 96.6% with a bilateral detection of 80.7% when considering all tracers used. However, when combination of indocyanine green and technetium was used the bilateral detection rate was 90.3%. Nodal metastases were detected in 17 (19.3%) cases, 8 (47%) of them corresponded to low volume metastasis (LVM), 7 (87.5%) of them diagnosed at ultrastaging pathologic exam. Finally, we obtained a sensitivity of 90%, a NPV of 97.5%, and a false negative rate (FNR) of 10% in the intermediate-risk EC compared to sensitivity of 85.7%, NPV of 96.6%, and FNR of 14.3% in the high-risk EC group. The only patient with isolated paraaortic nodal metastasis was found at the high-risk group, 1.1%.

conclusionsAccording to our results, full lymphadenectomy could be avoided by performing SLNB in patients with intermediate-risk EC because the only false negative case detected was at the beginning of ICG learning curve. For high-risk EC patients we did not find enough evidence to support the systematic avoidance of staging full lymph node dissection. Nevertheless, SLNB should be performed in all cases of EC as it improves LVM diagnosis substantially.

Indexed as

early stage endometrial cancerhigh-risk endometrial cancerintermediate-risk endometrial cancerisolated metastatic aortic lymph nodessentinel lymph node biopsysystematic lymphadenectomy

Identifiers

PMID33937061
PMCPMC8082098
OpenAlexW3155384082

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.