ArticleCancers2025
Implementation of a New Surgical Technique in a Gynecologic Oncology Centre: Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Its Learning Curve in Endometrial Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the introduction of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in early-stage endometrial cancer (EC), its learning curve, and factors influencing discrepancies between surgeons and pathologists.
methodsA single-centre retrospective observational study was conducted from June 2019 to December 2024 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University. Patients with EC with complete preoperative staging and planned for extrafascial hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and SLNB were included. Bilateral detection rates were compared among two main surgeons-one senior fellow (A) and one junior fellow (B)-and other supervised fellows. Learning curves were assessed using detection rates and cumulative sum analysis. Risk factors for failed detection were analysed.
resultsIn 337 patients, overall bilateral detection rates ranged from 80-92%. Surgeon A achieved 80% success by the 30th procedure and 89% at the 74th. Surgeon B, trained under A's supervision, reached 89% but later showed a decline after operating independently. The highest concordance with pathologists was noted for Surgeon A (94.6%), followed by B (92.2%) and others (84.9%). Discrepancies were mainly associated with the presence of fibroids (
conclusionsSNB in EC demonstrates an optimal learning curve that can be shortened through expert guidance. Extending supervised training to 30-35 procedures reduces post-independence decline and sustains high detection rates. Bilateral success, reflecting surgeon-pathologist concordance, is a strong indicator of the quality of a Gynecologic Oncology centre.
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.