↓ Skip to main content

Sentinel lymph node biopsy or elective neck dissection for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma?

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, October 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Sentinel lymph node biopsy or elective neck dissection for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma?
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, October 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00405-007-0465-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harri Keski-Säntti, Risto Kontio, Jyrki Törnwall, Ilmo Leivo, Sorjo Mätzke, Sinikka Suominen, Esa Leppänen, Timo Atula

Abstract

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) seems to be a promising method for staging clinically N0 neck in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). In the present study, SNB was performed on 46 patients having elective neck dissection (END; six bilateral dissections) for T1-T3N0 OSCC. Sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) were first examined according to only slightly modified standard histopathologic protocol including sections at 1-2 mm intervals and H&E staining. SLN that appeared false negative (i.e. metastatic non-SLN without metastasis in a SLN) after the initial histopathologic examination were further assessed by step sectioning at 150 microm intervals and immunohistochemistry. Of the 47 neck sides with at least one SLN identified, nine contained metastasis in nine patients. After the initial histopathologic examination, SLNs were negative for malignant cells in four out of the nine metastatic neck sides. In one neck side, two metastatic SLNs were detected after the additional meticulous histopathologic work-up of the initially false negative SLNs. Therefore, in three neck sides the SLN did not contain metastasis although there was a metastasis in a non-SLN. In all these three cases with a false negative SLN, only one SLN had been identified. The sensitivity of the method (employing extensive histopathologic work-up) for detection of occult cervical metastasis was 67% (6/9 neck sides). The sensitivity of SNB for detection of occult metastasis seems to be poor in cases where only one SLN can be identified. The results of this study do not entitle us to entirely replace END by SNB in patients with OSCC.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 3%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 7 24%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 55%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 24%
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 18 October 2007.
All research outputs
#15,240,835
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#1,172
of 3,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,244
of 71,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,033 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
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 71,701 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.