Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38634055›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2024

Risk factors associated with false negative rate of sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meng-Si Fan, Ke-Xin Qiu, Dong-Yue Wang, Hao Wang, Wei-Wei Zhang, Li Yan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. 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
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Sentinel lymph node distribution in endometrial cancer: clinical patterns and implications from a 292-patient cohort.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Meng-Si FanDepartment of Gynecology, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong Second Medical University, Key Laboratory of Laparoscopic Technology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Ke-Xin QiuDepartment of Gynecology, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong Second Medical University, Key Laboratory of Laparoscopic Technology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Dong-Yue WangSchool of Clinical Medicine, Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Hao WangSchool of Clinical Medicine, Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Wei-Wei ZhangDepartment of Gynecology, Tengzhou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Tengzhou, Shandong, China.
Li YanDepartment of Gynecology, Shandong Provincial Qianfoshan Hospital, Shandong Second Medical University, Key Laboratory of Laparoscopic Technology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Shandong First Medical University · CNShandong Provincial QianFoShan Hospital · CNTengzhou Central People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Currently, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is increasingly used in endometrial cancer, but the rate of missed metastatic lymph nodes compared to systemic lymph node dissection has been a concern. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the false negative rate (FNR) of SLNB in patients with endometrial cancer and to explore the risk factors associated with this FNR. Data sources: Three databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) were searched from initial database build to January 2023 by two independent reviewers. Research eligibility criteria: Studies were included if they included 10 or more women diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I or higher endometrial cancer, the study technique used sentinel lymph node localization biopsy, and the reported outcome metrics included false negative and/or FNR. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two authors independently reviewed the abstracts and full articles. The FNR and factors associated with FNR were synthesized through random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression. The results: We identified 62 eligible studies. The overall FNR for the 62 articles was 4% (95% CL 3-5).There was no significant difference in the FNR in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer compared to patients with low-risk endometrial cancer. There was no difference in the FNR for whether frozen sections were used intraoperatively. The type of dye used intraoperatively (indocyanine green/blue dye) were not significantly associated with the false negative rate. Cervical injection reduced the FNR compared with alternative injection techniques. Indocyanine green reduced the FNR compared with alternative Tc-99m. Postoperative pathologic ultrastaging reduced the FNR. Conclusions: Alternative injection techniques (other than the cervix), Tc-99m dye tracer, and the absence of postoperative pathologic ultrastaging are risk factors for a high FNR in endometrial cancer patients who undergo SLNB; therefore, we should be vigilant for missed diagnosis of metastatic lymph nodes after SLNB in such populations. Systematic review registration: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023433637.

Indexed as

endometrial cancerendometrial neoplasmsmeta-analysissentinel lymph nodesentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID38634055
PMCPMC11021692
OpenAlexW4393867601

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.