ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
Survey study on sentinel lymph node biopsy: indications and perceived value among small animal surgical specialists.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Despite the growing adoption of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for nodal staging in dogs, standardized guidelines defining its specific indications remain lacking. This survey study aimed to assess the indications for SLNB among small animal surgical specialists and evaluate its perceived value. Methods: An online survey was distributed through the European College of Veterinary Surgeons (ECVS), comprising five sections: clinical practice type, nodal staging, lymphadenectomy, mapping techniques, and the perceived value of SLNB. Descriptive statistics summarized responses, while cluster analysis explored associations between clinical practice type and SLNB recommendations. Results: Seventy-four surgeons participated, with 74% practicing in non-academic and 26% in academic institutions. The majority (80%) performed lymphadenectomy with histopathological evaluation for nodal staging, and 53% recommended it for all malignant tumors, irrespective of nodal size. Additionally, 80% preferred SLNB over regional lymphadenectomy, particularly for specific tumor types (mast cell tumors, melanomas, carcinomas) or anatomical locations (oral tumors). Indirect CT lymphography was the most commonly used preoperative mapping technique (59.4%), yet only 23% of respondents combined preoperative and intraoperative mapping techniques. While 63% considered SLNB a reliable diagnostic tool, cluster analysis indicated that the type of clinical practice (academic vs. non-academic) did not influence SLNB recommendations. Discussion: Despite a low response rate (8.3%), findings suggest that SLNB is widely performed by specialists across different practice settings, particularly for select tumor types. However, with 20% not performing SLNB and 37% uncertain about its reliability, these results highlight the need for standardized guidelines to define clear indications and improve consistency in clinical decision-making.
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.