SynthesisHead & neck2022
Efficacy of different sentinel lymph node biopsy protocols in oral squamous cell carcinoma: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Head & neck, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of different sentinel lymph node biopsy protocols in oral squamous cell carcinoma: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Head & neck · 2022Pooled it
- Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Early-Stage Oral Cavity Cancer: Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy and False-Negative Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is highly protocolized in other cancers, however, this is not the case for oral squamous cell carcinoma patients, hence our objective was to evaluate the different protocols published. A specific study protocol was designed and subsequently registered on PROSPERO (Ref. CRD42021279217). Twenty-three articles were included in the meta-analysis. The grouped sensitivity of the SNB was 82% (95% CI: 0.74-0.88), and the grouped specificity was 100% (95% CI: 0.99-1.00). The use of other radiotracers other than pre-operative lopamidol showed higher values of sensitivity of 82.80% (95% CI: 76.90%-87.50%; p < 0.001). The use of the blue dye stain showed higher sensitivity values of 85.60% (95% CI: 71.90%-93.20%), compared to sensitivity values of 77.50% when it was not used (95% CI: 69.10%-84.20%) (p < 0.001). Diagnostic rates are variable and they were significantly better when 99mTc was used in all its variations and accompanied by the blue dye staining.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.