SynthesisActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2026
The false-negative rate of sentinel lymph node biopsy and its related factors in early-stage cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the false-negative rate (FNR) of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) performed in patients with early-stage cervical cancer (ECC), and to study the risk factors affecting FNR. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe searched three databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Library) for articles published in the last decade from January 2014 to September 2024. Publications on patients with ECC who underwent SLNB, with information on the FNR of SLNB, were included. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias and the clinical applicability of the included studies. The FNR and associated factors were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression.
resultsA total of 49 eligible studies with a low to moderate risk of bias were included in the final analysis. The overall FNR was 10.9% (95 CI: 6.0-16.7). No significant differences in FNR were found for different reference standards or tumor diameters (< 2 cm vs. ≥ 2 cm). However, different tracers (e.g. methylene blue [MB], carbon nanoparticle [CNP], indocyanine green [ICG], and Technetium-99m [Tc-99m] combined with other tracers) appear to account for the different FNRs. In the meta-regression analysis, we found that the proportion of SLNs located in the obturator area was significantly negatively associated with FNR (coefficient = -0.88, p = 0.04).
interpretationThe overall FNR of SLNB for ECC was approximately 10.9%. Factors that tended to reduce the FNR included using a low-volume metastatic detection technique, having a tumor diameter of < 2 cm, employing specific tracer regimens, and identifying more than one lymph node in the obturator fossa. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42024608411).
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.