Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41863199›Full record

ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2026

Sentinel lymph node detection in early-stage breast cancer - Are technetium-99m-nanocolloid and superparamagnetic iron oxide diagnostically equivalent procedures? A propensity score matched real world data analysis.

Ina Shehaj, Katharina Stuppy, Amelie Löwe, Paul Löwe, Christian Ruckes, Pia-Elisabeth Baqué, Mathias Schreckenberger, Yaman Degirmenci, Anne-Sophie Heimes, Antje Lebrecht and 6 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

16 authors.

Ina ShehajDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany; Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Electronic address: inashehaj@hotmail.com.
Katharina StuppyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Amelie LöweDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Paul LöweDepartment of Internal Medicine, Marienhaus Hospital, Mainz, Germany.
Christian RuckesUniversity Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Interdisciplinary Centre for Clinical Trials (IZKS), Mainz, Germany.
Pia-Elisabeth BaquéDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany.
Mathias SchreckenbergerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany.
Yaman DegirmenciDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Anne-Sophie HeimesDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Antje LebrechtDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Andrea HelischDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany.
Helmut ReberDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany.
Kathrin StewenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Marcus SchmidtDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Annette HasenburgDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Slavomir KrajnakDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131, Mainz, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have compared validated tracers, such as the radioactive tracer technetium-99m nanocolloid (99mTc-nanocolloid) and superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO), for sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in early-stage breast cancer (eBC). These studies mostly investigated the differences in detection rate and SNB-related adverse events. The aim of our study was to determine whether there are any crucial differences between the two procedures, including the duration of surgery and the number of detected sentinel lymph nodes (SN), which may affect patient treatment and the standard of care in eBC. All patients were treated at the University Medical Centre Mainz by certified breast surgeons. Two consecutive groups of patients were identified based on the injected tracer: Technetium Group (N = 517), patients treated from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019, with 99mTc-nanocolloid as tracer and SPIO Group (N = 456), patients treated from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022, with superparamagnetic iron oxide particles as ferromagnetic tracer. To avoid potential bias, we performed propensity score matching. After performing propensity score matching, the total surgery time was significantly shorter in the Technetium Group compared to the SPIO Group [64 (48 - 84) vs. 71.5 (58 - 98) minutes; p < 0.001]. Both groups did not differ regarding detection rates, or complications (p > 0.05). The median number of removed SN was 1.0 in the 99mTc-nanocolloid Group and 2.0 in the SPIO Group. In conclusion, our analysis showed that the use of 99mTc- nanocolloid for SNB resulted in shorter operation time and removal of less SN compared to the SPIO intervention.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFerric CompoundsMagnetic Iron Oxide NanoparticlesRadiopharmaceuticalsSentinel Lymph NodeSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyTechnetium Tc 99m Aggregated AlbuminAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesFerric Compoundsferric oxideRadiopharmaceuticalsTechnetium Tc 99m Aggregated Albumintechnetium Tc 99m nanocolloid99mTc-nanokolloidSentinel lymph nodeSPIO

Identifiers

PMID41863199
PMCPMC13019101

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.