Show simple item record

What is a sentinel node? Re-evaluating the 10% rule for sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma

dc.contributor.authorKroon, Hidde M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLowe, Lorien_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, Sandra L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFullen, Douglas R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSu, Lyndon D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCimmino, Vincent M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChang, Alfred E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Timothy M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSabel, Michael S.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2007-09-20T18:41:37Z
dc.date.available2008-09-08T14:25:14Zen_US
dc.date.issued2007-06-15en_US
dc.identifier.citationKroon, Hidde M.; Lowe, Lori; Wong, Sandra; Fullen, Doug; Su, Lyndon; Cimmino, Vincent; Chang, Alfred E.; Johnson, Timothy; Sabel, Michael S. (2007)."What is a sentinel node? Re-evaluating the 10% rule for sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma." Journal of Surgical Oncology 95(8): 623-628. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/56055>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-4790en_US
dc.identifier.issn1096-9098en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/56055
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17345610&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractIntroduction Many surgeons use the “10% rule” to define whether a lymph node is a sentinel node (SLN) when staging malignant melanoma. However, this increases the number of SLN removed and the time and cost of the procedure. We examined the impact of raising this threshold on the accuracy of the procedure. Methods We reviewed the records of 561 patients with melanoma (624 basins) who underwent SLN with technetium Tc99 labeled sulfur colloid using a definition of a SLN as 10% of that of the node with the highest counts per minute (CPM). Results Of the 624 basins, 154 (25%) were positive for metastases. An average of 1.9 nodes per basin were removed (range 1–6). Metastases were found in the hottest node in 137 cases (89% of positive basins, 97% of basins overall). Increasing the threshold above 10% decreased the number of nodes excised and the costs involved, but incrementally raised the number of false negative cases above baseline (a 4% increase for a “20% rule,” 5% for a “30% rule,” 6% for a “40% rule,” and 7% for a “50% rule”). Taking only the hottest node would raise the false negative rate by 11%. Conclusions Although using thresholds higher than 10% for the definition of a SLN will minimize the extent of surgery and decrease the costs associated with the procedure, it will compromise the accuracy of the procedure and is not recommended. J. Surg. Oncol. 2007;95:623–628. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.en_US
dc.format.extent178700 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherLife and Medical Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherCancer Research, Oncology and Pathologyen_US
dc.titleWhat is a sentinel node? Re-evaluating the 10% rule for sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanomaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOncology and Hematologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSurgery and Anesthesiologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan ; Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan ; Department of Dermatology, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan ; University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, 3304 Cancer Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Fax: (734) 647-9647.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid17345610en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/56055/1/20729_ftp.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jso.20729en_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Surgical Oncologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.