↓ Skip to main content

Improved False-Negative Rates with Intraoperative Identification of Clipped Nodes in Patients Undergoing Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Improved False-Negative Rates with Intraoperative Identification of Clipped Nodes in Patients Undergoing Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, July 2018
DOI 10.1245/s10434-018-6575-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neslihan Cabıoğlu, Hasan Karanlık, Dilek Kangal, Enver Özkurt, Gizem Öner, Fatma Sezen, Ravza Yılmaz, Mustafa Tükenmez, Semen Önder, Abdullah İğci, Vahit Özmen, Ahmet Dinççağ, Gülgün Engin, Mahmut Müslümanoğlu

Abstract

Identification and resection of a clipped node was shown to decrease the false-negative rate (FNR) of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for patients presenting with initially node-positive breast cancer. Between March 2014 and March 2016, a prospective trial analyzed 98 patients with axilla-positive locally advanced breast cancer (T1-4, N1-3) to assess the feasibility and efficacy of placing clips into most suspicious biopsy-proven node. The study considered blue, radioisotope active, and suspiciously palpable nodes as sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs). The SLN identification rate was 87.8%. The median age of the patients with an SLNB (n = 86) was 44 years (range 28-66 years). Of these patients, 77 (88.4%) had cT1-3 disease, and 10 (11.6%) had cT4 disease. The majority of the patients (n = 66, 76.7%) had cN1, whereas 21 patients (23.3%) had cN2 and cN3. A combined method was used for 37 patients (43%), whereas blue dye alone was used for the remaining patients (57%). The clipped node was the SLN in 70 patients (81.4%). For the patients with cN1 before NAC, the FNR was found to be 4.2% (1/24) when the clipped node was identified as an SLN. However, the FNR was estimated to be as high as 16.7% (1/6) for the patients with cN1 before NAC when the clipped node was found to be a non-SLN. The study results also suggest that axillary dissection could be omitted for patients presenting initially with N1 disease and with a negative clipped node as the SLN after NAC due to the low FNR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 16 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 51%
Unspecified 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Energy 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 20 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,641,800
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#5,053
of 6,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,942
of 327,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#118
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.