Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2008

01-05-2008 | Gynecologic Oncology

Use of the Sentinel Node Procedure to Stage Endometrial Cancer

Authors: Marcos Ballester, MD, Gil Dubernard, MD, Roman Rouzier, MD, PhD, Emmanuel Barranger, MD, Emile Darai, MD, PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 5/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Lymph node status is a major prognostic factor and a criterion for adjuvant therapy in endometrial cancer. The sentinel lymph node (SN) procedure has emerged as a possible alternative to systematic lymphadenectomy. The aims of this study were to determine the detection rate and the false-negative rate of the SN procedure, and its contribution to the staging of women with endometrial cancer.

Methods

Forty-six patients with endometrial cancer underwent the sentinel node procedure followed by pelvic lymphadenectomy. SNs were detected with a dual or single labelling method in 39 and 7 cases, respectively. All SNs were analysed by both hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and immunochemistry.

Results

SNs were identified in 40 patients (87%), whose mean number of SN was 2.6 (range 1–5). The SN detection rate was significantly lower with the single label than with the dual label (p = 0.01). Ten women (25%) had a positive SN on final histology (i.e. there were no false negatives). A correlation was observed between lymph node involvement and both histological grade (p = 0.01) and lymphovascular space involvement (p = 0.001). The stage predicted by magnetic resonance (MR) imaging correlated poorly with the Federation International of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage. Among the ten women with a positive SN, three of the four women with a grade 1 tumour at biopsy had grade 2–3 disease on final histology. Seven of the ten women with a positive SN underwent external pelvic radiotherapy, based solely on their SN involvement.

Conclusion

The SN procedure can reliably determine lymph node status in women with endometrial cancer. Given the limited capacity of MR imaging to detect myometrial invasion, and of biopsy to determine histological grade, our results support the systematic use of the SN procedure in women with endometrial cancer, including those with presumed early-stage disease and/or well-differentiated tumours.
Literature
1.
2.
Barranger E, Cortez A, Grahek D, et al. Laparoscopic sentinel node procedure using a combination of patent blue and radiocolloid in women with endometrial cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11:344–9.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Frumovitz M, Bodurka DC, Broaddus RR, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in women with high-risk endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 104:100–3.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Kilgore LC, Partridge EE, Alvarez RD, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: survival comparisons of patients with and without pelvic node sampling. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 56:29–33.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Lampe B, Kurzl R, Hantschmann P. Prognostic factors that predict pelvic lymph node metastasis from endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1994; 74:2502–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, et al. Efficacy of systematic lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy in node-positive endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol 2006; 101:200–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Podratz KC, Mariani A, Webb MJ. Staging and therapeutic value of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1998; 70:163–4.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Vizza E, Galati GM, Corrado G, et al. Role of pelvic lymphadenectomy in the management of stage I endometrial cancer: our experience. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2003; 24:126–8.PubMed
9.
Wolfson AH, Sightler SE, Markoe AM, et al. The prognostic significance of surgical staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 1992; 45:142–6.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, et al. Low-risk corpus cancer: is lymphadenectomy or radiotherapy necessary? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:1506–19.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Delpech Y, Cortez A, Coutant C, et al. The sentinel node concept in endometrial cancer: histopathologic validation by serial section and immunohistochemistry. Ann Oncol 2007; 18:1799–1803.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Echt ML, Finan MA, Hoffman MS, et al. Detection of sentinel lymph nodes with lymphazurin in cervical, uterine, and vulvar malignancies. South Med J 1999; 92:204–8.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Burke TW, Levenback C, Tornos C, et al. Intraabdominal lymphatic mapping to direct selective pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in women with high-risk endometrial cancer: results of a pilot study. Gynecol Oncol 1996; 62:169–73.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Holub Z, Jabor A, Kliment L. Comparison of two procedures for sentinel lymph node detection in patients with endometrial cancer: a pilot study. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2002; 23:53–7.PubMed
15.
Pelosi E, Arena V, Baudino B, et al. Preliminary study of sentinel node identification with 99mTc colloid and blue dye in patients with endometrial cancer. Tumori 2002; 88:S9–10.PubMed
16.
Lecuru F, Neji K, Robin F, et al. [Lymphatic drainage of the uterus. Preliminary results of an experimental study]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1997; 26:418–23.
17.
Jobo T, Sato R, Arai T, et al. Lymph node pathway in the spread of endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2005; 26:167–9.PubMed
18.
Obermair A, Geramou M, Gucer F, et al. Does hysteroscopy facilitate tumor cell dissemination? Incidence of peritoneal cytology from patients with early stage endometrial carcinoma following dilatation and curettage (D & C) versus hysteroscopy and D & C. Cancer 2000; 88:139–43.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Takac I, Zegura B. Office hysteroscopy and the risk of microscopic extrauterine spread in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 107:94–8.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Coutant C, Morel O, Delpech Y, et al. Laparoscopic sentinel node biopsy in cervical cancer using a combined detection: 5-years experience. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14:2392–9.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM, Calingaert B, et al. Resection of lymph node metastases influences survival in stage IIIC endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 99:689–95.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Yabushita H, Shimazu M, Yamada H, et al. Occult lymph node metastases detected by cytokeratin immunohistochemistry predict recurrence in node-negative endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 80:139–44.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Kodama J, Seki N, Ojima Y, et al. Risk factors for early and late postoperative complications of patients with endometrial cancer. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; 124:222–6.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Todo Y, Okamoto K, Hayashi M, et al. A validation study of a scoring system to estimate the risk of lymph node metastasis for patients with endometrial cancer for tailoring the indication of lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 104:623–8.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, et al. Routes of lymphatic spread:a study of 112 consecutive patients with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 81:100–4.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, et al. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 1987; 60:2035–41.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Eltabbakh GH, Shamonki J, Mount SL. Surgical stage, final grade, and survival of women with endometrial carcinoma whose preoperative endometrial biopsy shows well-differentiated tumors. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 99:309–12.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Use of the Sentinel Node Procedure to Stage Endometrial Cancer
Authors
Marcos Ballester, MD
Gil Dubernard, MD
Roman Rouzier, MD, PhD
Emmanuel Barranger, MD
Emile Darai, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-05-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 5/2008
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-9841-1

Other articles of this Issue 5/2008

Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2008 Go to the issue

Melanomas

Tumor-Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy of the Groin in Clinically Node-Negative Melanoma Patients: Superficial or Superficial and Deep Lymph Node Dissection?

Hepatic and Pancreatic Tumors

Surgical Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond Milan Criteria. Results of Liver Resection, Salvage Transplantation, and Primary Liver Transplantation

Erratum

Factors Predictive of Nonsentinel Lymph Node Involvement and Clinical Outcome in Melanoma Patients With Metastatic Sentinel Lymph Node

Melanomas

Sorting Through the Heterogeneity of Recurrent Melanoma

Other

HIPEC: The Complexities of Clinical Trials

Breast Oncology

Technical Considerations in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: 82 Consecutive Cases without Necrosis