ArticleMagyar onkologia2026
[Sentinel lymph node mapping in colorectal and anal tumors from the beginning until now].
Article in Magyar onkologia, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSentinel lymph node biopsy in colorectal cancer remains controversial. Lymph node metastasis is the most important prognostic factor, and even in the absence of lymph node metastasis, the risk of local recurrence is 15-20%.
methodsThe sentinel lymph node was identified in vivo by subserosal injection of blue dye or indocyanine green (ICG), and ex vivo by submucosal or subserosal injection. Stained lymph nodes were examined by the pathologist conventionally with hematoxylin-eosin staining, and in cases of negativity, with serial sectioning and immunohistochemistry and/ or RT-PCR.
resultsDespite the high detection rate of 70-99%, sensitivity for macrometastasis is low (33-93.1%), but improves with the detection of micrometastasis. Stage migration based on micrometastasis detection ranged between 5-15%. Aberrant lymphatic drainage occurs in 3.9-7.1% of cases.
conclusionsAt present, the sensitivity of colorectal sentinel lymph node identification is not suitable for guiding treatment, as the false negative rate is high. This is due to the lack of standardization, inadequate patient selection, and the large number of T3-4 stage tumors. Several authors recommend investigating early T1-2 stage tumors, the incidence of which is increasing due to screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42731003PMC13577722What 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.