Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34241688›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2021

The combination of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with blue dye for sentinel lymph node detection in clinically negative node breast cancer.

Xiaojiang Wang, Lina Tang, Weiqin Huang, Zhaolei Cui, Dan Hu, Zhaoming Zhong, Xiufeng Wu

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Xiaojiang WangDepartment of Molecular Pathology, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, No. 420 Fuma Road, Fuzhou, 350014, People's Republic of China.
Lina TangDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Weiqin HuangDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Zhaolei CuiLaboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Research, Fujian Provincial Key Laboratory of Tumor Biotherapy, Department of Clinical Laboratory, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Dan HuDepartment of Pathology, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Zhaoming ZhongDepartment of Ultrasound, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China.
Xiufeng WuDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital & Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, 350014, Fujian, People's Republic of China. wxf200104@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8007-7072
Fujian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the value of the combination of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and blue dye (BD) for SLN detection in patients with clinically negative node breast cancer.

methodsPatients with clinically negative node breast cancer were randomized into two cohorts for SLN biopsy (SLNB): the combination method cohort using CEUS and BD together, and the single BD method cohort. Standard axillary lymph node dissection was performed if any of the SLNs confirmed positive by pathology. The identification rate, the number of SLNs removed and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were evaluated between two cohorts. In addition, we assessed the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, false-negative rate of CEUS for diagnosis of SLNs based on patterns of CEUS enhancement.

results144 consecutive patients with clinically negative node breast cancer were randomized into two cohorts. Each cohort consisted of 72 cases. In the combination method cohort, contrast-enhanced lymphatic vessels were clearly visualized and SLNs were accurately localized in 72 cases. The identification rate and the mean number of SLNs detected by the combination method were 100% (72/72) and 3.26 (1-9), respectively. In contrast, in the single BD method cohort, SLNs in 69 cases were successfully identified. The identification rate and the mean number of SLNs using BD alone were 95.8% (69/72) and 2.21 (1-4), respectively. According to patterns of CEUS enhancement, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and the FNR of CEUS for SLN diagnosis were 69.2%, 96.6%, 91.7%, and 30.8%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 50 months for the combination method cohort and 51 months for the blue dye alone cohort, five patients in the combination method cohort and nine in the blue dye alone cohort had recurrence. RFS rates showed no significant difference (P = 0.26) between two cohorts.

conclusionThe combination of CEUS and BD is more effective than BD alone for SLNB in clinically negative node patients with an identification rate as high as 100%. Use of BD and CEUS in combination may provide the possibility of a non-radioactive alternative method for SLNB in centers without access to radioisotope.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsSentinel Lymph NodeAxillaContrast MediaFemaleHumansLymph NodesProspective StudiesSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyUltrasonographyContrast MediaBlue dyeBreast cancerContrast-enhanced ultrasonographySentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID34241688
OpenAlexW3181380100

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.