ArticleHeliyon2024
The clinical value of carbon nanoparticles in sentinel lymph node biopsy for early vulvar cancer.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanoplatforms for Sentinel and Tumor-Draining Lymph Node Mapping: From Visualization to Pathway-Informed Staging.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Sentinel node technologies in low-resource settings: Current evidence and future perspectives.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2026Article
- AI-Assisted surgical vision: evaluating YOLOv8 and YOLOv12 for real-time detection in colon cancer surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Carbon nanoparticle (CNP)-guided sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been extensively adopted as a cost-effective and highly efficient method for tracing malignant tumors except for those associated with vulvar cancer. The current study aimed to validate the feasibility and efficacy of CNPs in tracking sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in patients with early vulvar cancer. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with vulvar cancer at our institution from January 2016 to April 2022 who were pathologically diagnosed and underwent SLNB or inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy (IFLND). CNPs were the only lymphatic tracer used in SLNB. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and follow-up results, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were compared between the SLNB and IFLND groups. Results: Data from 52 patients were collected and investigated. Forty groins of 22 patients who underwent SLNB with CNP tracing were included. Black-stained SLNs were detected in 32 groins of 19 patients, and the rates of CNP detection by patient and by groin were 86.4 % and 80 %, respectively. Patients who underwent SLNB had better perioperative outcomes than those who underwent IFLND in certain aspects (groin drainage rate: 41.2 % and 80 %, respectively, p < 0.05; daily drainage volume (ml): 12.49 and 36.4, respectively, p < 0.05; and inguinal wound healing rate: 100 % and 80 %, respectively, p < 0.05). The results of survival analysis indicated similar prognoses for node-negative patients who underwent CNP-guided SLNB or IFLND. Conclusions: Sentinel lymph node mapping with CNPs in vulvar cancer is feasible and demonstrates considerable biosecurity. With a satisfactory SLN detection rate achieved expediently, CNPs are a promising lymphatic tracer worthy of further utilization in vulvar cancer and could be an alternative option to canonical tracers.
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.