Contribution of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy with sentinel node biopsy in patients with IB2–IIB cervical cancer
Loading...
Authors
Chéreau, E.
Feron, J-G
Ballester, M.
Coutant, C.
Bezu, C.
Rouzier, R.
Touboul, E.
Daraï, E.
Issue Date
2011-12-06
Type
Article
Language
en_US
Keywords
Pelvic Lymphadenectomy , Paraaortic Lymphadenectomy , Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer , Sentinel Node Biopsy , Survival
Alternative Title
Abstract
Objective: Detection of lymph node involvement in women with IB2–IIB cervical cancer could have a positive effect on survival. We set out to evaluate the incidence of pelvic and/or para-aortic lymph node involvement using the sentinel node (SN) biopsy and its impact on survival.
Methods: From 2002 to 2010, 66 women with IB2–IIB cervical cancer underwent a pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy with SN biopsy. Survival between groups according to lymph node status was evaluated.
Results: Mean tumour size was 43.5 mm. At least one SN was detected in 69% of the 45 SN procedures performed. Sixteen of these patients had metastatic SN and the false negative rate was 20%. Metastatic pelvic SNs or non-SNs were detected in 33 patients (50%), including pelvic-positive nodes in 26 (40%), pelvic- and paraaortic-positive lymph nodes in seven (11%), and paraaortic skip metastases in two (6%). Positive paraaortic node was the sole determinant for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS; P<0.001). Differences in DFS and OS between groups according to the nodal status were observed (P<0.001).
Conclusion: SN procedure gave a higher rate of metastasis detection. Further studies are required to evaluate whether pre-therapeutic node staging, including paraaortic and pelvic lymphanedectomy, should be performed.
Description
Citation
Chéreau, E., Feron, J. G., Ballester, M., Coutant, C., Bezu, C., Rouzier, R., Touboul, E., & Daraï, E. (2012). Contribution of pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy with sentinel node biopsy in patients with IB2-IIB cervical cancer. British journal of cancer, 106(1), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.541
Publisher
British Journal of Cancer