Comparison of Different Near-Infrared Technologies to Detect Sentinel Lymph Node in Uterine Cancer: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Surgical Procedures
2.2. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Available online: https://gco.iarc.fr/ (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- Constantine, G.D.; Kessler, G.; Graham, S.; Goldstein, S.R. Increased Incidence of Endometrial Cancer Following the Women’s Health Initiative: An Assessment of Risk Factors. J. Women’s Health 2019, 28, 237–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Concin, N.; Matias-Guiu, X.; Vergote, I.; Cibula, D.; Mirza, M.R.; Marnitz, S.; Ledermann, J.; Bosse, T.; Chargari, C.; Fagotti, A.; et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2020, 31, 12–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cemal, Y.; Jewell, S.; Albornoz, C.R.; Pusic, A.; Mehrara, B.J. Systematic review of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes in patients with oncologic related lower extremity lymphedema. Lymphat. Res. Biol. 2013, 11, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Carlson, J.W.; Kauderer, J.; Hutson, A.; Carter, J.; Armer, J.; Lockwood, S.; Nolte, S.; Stewart, B.R.; Wenzel, L.; Walker, J.; et al. GOG 244—The lymphedema and gynecologic cancer (LEG) study: Incidence and risk factors in newly diagnosed patients. Gynecol. Oncol. 2020, 156, 467–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rossi, E.C.; Kowalski, L.D.; Scalici, J.; Cantrell, L.; Schuler, K.; Hanna, R.K.; Method, M.; Ade, M.; Ivanova, A.; Boggess, J.F. A comparison of sentinel lymph node biopsy to lymphadenectomy for endometrial cancer staging (FIRES trial): A multicentre, prospective, cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2017, 18, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koh, W.J.; Abu-Rustum, N.R.; Bean, S.; Bradley, K.; Campos, S.M.; Cho, K.R.; Chon, H.S.; Chu, C.; Cohn, D.; Crispens, M.A.; et al. Uterine Neoplasms, Version 1.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 2018, 16, 170–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buda, A.; Crivellaro, C.; Elisei, F.; Di Martino, G.; Guerra, L.; De Ponti, E.; Cuzzocrea, M.; Giuliani, D.; Sina, F.; Magni, S.; et al. Impact of Indocyanine Green for Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping in Early Stage Endometrial and Cervical Cancer: Comparison with Conventional Radiotracer (99m)Tc and/or Blue Dye. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2016, 23, 2183–2191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Papadia, A.; Zapardiel, I.; Bussi, B.; Ghezzi, F.; Ceccaroni, M.; De Ponti, E.; Elisei, F.; Imboden, S.; de la Noval, B.D.; Gasparri, M.L.; et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping in patients with stage I endometrial carcinoma: A focus on bilateral mapping identification by comparing radiotracer Tc99m with blue dye versus indocyanine green fluorescent dye. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 143, 475–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ruscito, I.; Gasparri, M.L.; Braicu, E.I.; Bellati, F.; Raio, L.; Sehouli, J.; Mueller, M.D.; Panici, P.B.; Papadia, A. Sentinel Node Mapping in Cervical and Endometrial Cancer: Indocyanine Green Versus Other Conventional Dyes-A Meta-Analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2016, 23, 3749–3756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frumovitz, M.; Plante, M.; Lee, P.S.; Sandadi, S.; Lilja, J.F.; Escobar, P.F.; Gien, L.T.; Urbauer, D.L.; Abu-Rustum, N.R. Near-infrared fluorescence for detection of sentinel lymph nodes in women with cervical and uterine cancers (FILM): A randomised, phase 3, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018, 19, 1394–1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Papadia, A.; Imboden, S.; Gasparri, M.L.; Siegenthaler, F.; Fink, A.; Mueller, M.D. Endometrial and cervical cancer patients with multiple sentinel lymph nodes at laparoscopic ICG mapping: How many are enough? J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 142, 1831–1836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://www.karlstorz.com/cps/rde/xbcr/karlstorz_assets/ASSETS/3593032.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- Available online: https://www.olympus-europa.com/medical/rmt/media/en/Content/Content-MSD/Images/SRP-Pages/SRP-VISERA-ELITE-II/VISERA-ELITE-II_Brochure_A4_EN_18007.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- VS3 Iridium System [User’s Guide]; Medtronic: Petach Tikva, Israel, 2016.
- Thomaier, L.; Jager, L.; Stone, R.; Wethington, S.; Fader, A.; Tanner, E.J. Risk of empty lymph node packets in sentinel lymph node mapping for endometrial cancer using indocyanine green. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2019, 29, 513–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bedyńska, M.; Szewczyk, G.; Klepacka, T.; Sachadel, K.; Maciejewski, T.; Szukiewicz, D.; Fijałkowska, A. Sentinel lymph node mapping using indocyanine green in patients with uterine and cervical neoplasms: Restrictions of the method. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2019, 299, 1373–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lopez Labrousse, M.I.; Frumovitz, M.; Guadalupe Patrono, M.; Ramirez, P.T. Sentinel lymph node mapping in minimally invasive surgery: Role of imaging with color-segmented fluorescence (CSF). Gynecol. Oncol. 2017, 146, 676–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gonçalves, E.; Figueiredo, O.; Costa, F. Sentinel lymph node in endometrial cancer: An overview. Gynecol. Surg. 2013, 10, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barlin, J.N.; Khoury-Collado, F.; Kim, C.H.; Leitao MMJr Chi, D.S.; Sonoda, Y.; Alektiar, K.; DeLair, D.F.; Barakat, R.R.; Abu-Rustum, N.R. The importance of applying a sentinel lymph node mapping algorithm in endometrial cancer staging: Beyond removal of blue nodes. Gynecol. Oncol. 2012, 125, 531–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moloney, K.; Janda, M.; Frumovitz, M.; Leitao, M.; Abu-Rustum, N.R.; Rossi, E.; Nicklin, J.L.; Plante, M.; Lecuru, F.R.; Buda, A.; et al. Development of a surgical competency assessment tool for sentinel lymph node dissection by minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2021, 31, 647–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Restaino, S.; Buda, A.; Puppo, A.; Capozzi, V.A.; Sozzi, G.; Casarin, J.; Gallitelli, V.; Murgia, F.; Vizzielli, G.; Baroni, A.; et al. Anatomical distribution of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with endometrial cancer: A multicenter study. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2022, 32, 517–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sozzi, G.; Fanfani, F.; Berretta, R.; Capozzi, V.A.; Uccella, S.; Buono, N.; Giallombardo, V.; Di Donna, M.C.; Monterossi, G.; Restaino, S.; et al. Laparoscopic sentinel node mapping with intracervical indocyanine green injection for endometrial cancer: The SENTIFAIL study—A multicentric analysis of predictors of failed mapping. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2020, 30, 1713–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jewell, E.L.; Huang, J.J.; Abu-Rustum, N.R.; Gardner, G.J.; Brown, C.L.; Sonoda, Y.; Barakat, R.R.; Levine, D.A.; Leitao, M.M., Jr. Detection of sentinel lymph nodes in minimally invasive surgery using indo- cyanine green and near-infrared fluorescence imaging for uterine and cervical malignancies. Gynecol. Oncol. 2014, 133, 274–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bigdeli, A.K.; Gazyakan, E.; Schmidt, V.J.; Hernekamp, F.J.; Harhaus, L.; Henzler, T. Indocyanine green fluorescence for free-flap perfusion imaging revisited: Advanced decision making by virtual perfusion reality in Visionsense™ fusion imaging angiography. Surg. Innov. 2016, 23, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Papadia, A.; Gasparri, M.L.; Buda, A.; Mueller, M.D. Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer: Comparison of fluorescence dye with traditional radiocolloid and blue. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 143, 2039–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Buda, A.; Di Martino, G.; De Ponti, E.; Passoni, P.; Sina, F.; Reato, C.; Vecchione, F.; Giuliani, D. Laparoscopic Sentinel Node Mapping in Cervical and Endometrial Malignancies: A Case-Control Study Comparing Two Near-Infrared Fluorescence Systems. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2018, 25, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Variables | N = 74 (Range, %) |
---|---|
Demographic and preoperative variables | |
Median Age, years (range) | 60 (29–75) |
Median BMI, kg/m2 (range) | 24.1 (18.3–34.9) |
Preoperative histology | |
Endometrioid | 59 (79.7) |
Serous | 4 (5.4) |
Clear-cell | 3 (4.1) |
Other | 3 (4.1) |
n.a. | 5 (6.7) |
Preoperative grading | |
1 | 20 (27.0) |
2 | 25 (33.7) |
3 | 17 (22.9) |
n.a. | 12 (16.2) |
Preoperative clinical FIGO stage | |
IA | 41 (55.4) |
IB | 18 (24.3) |
II | 2 (2.7) |
IIIA | 1 (1.4) |
n.a. | 12 (16.2) |
Surgical Approach | |
Laparoscopy | 70 (94.0) |
Laparotomy | 4 (6) |
Surgical procedures | |
Total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo oophorectomy | 74 (100.0) |
SLNB | 74 (100.0) |
Re-injection | 24 (32.4) |
Monolateral | 19 |
Bilateral | 5 |
Unilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy | 13 (17.6) |
Bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy | 4 (5.4) |
Paraaortic lymphadenectomy | 2 (2.7) |
Operative time (min) [median] | 119 (45–618) |
Intraoperative bleeding (ml) [median] | 50 (20–300) |
Final histology | |
Endometrioid | 62 (83.8) |
Non-Endometroid | 12 (16.2) |
Tumor characteristics | |
Median diameter, mm (range) | 25.5 (3–110) |
LVSI | 27 (36.5) |
MELF pattern | 4 (5.5) |
Histologic grade | |
1 | 11 (14.8) |
2 | 43 (58.1) |
3 | 19 (25.7) |
n.a. | 1 (1.4) |
FIGO Stage | |
IA | 48 (64.9) |
IB | 11 (14.9) |
II | 3 (4.1) |
IIIA | 1 (1.4) |
IIIB | 1 (1.4) |
IIIC1 | 6 (8.1) |
IIIC2 | 1 (1.4) |
IVB | 3 (4.1) |
SNIR | LNIR | |
---|---|---|
No Mapping | 2 (2.7%) | 2 (2.7%) |
Unilateral mapping | 16 (21.6%) | 9 (12.2%) |
Bilateral mapping | 56 (75.7%) | 63 (85.1%) |
Olympus vs. Medtronic—Cohen’s Kappa and 95% CI | |||
---|---|---|---|
Cohen’s Kappa | Inf 95% CI | Sup 95% CI | |
Mapping | 0.722 | 0.53 | 0.91 |
SLN location right | 0.980 | 0.94 | 1.02 |
SLN location left | 0.886 | 0.80 | 0.93 |
SLN number right | 0.834 | 0.68 | 0.91 |
SLN number left | 0.654 | 0.44 | 0.76 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Restaino, S.; Bizzarri, N.; Tarantino, V.; Pelligra, S.; Moroni, R.; Palmieri, E.; Monterossi, G.; Costantini, B.; Scambia, G.; Fanfani, F. Comparison of Different Near-Infrared Technologies to Detect Sentinel Lymph Node in Uterine Cancer: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7377. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127377
Restaino S, Bizzarri N, Tarantino V, Pelligra S, Moroni R, Palmieri E, Monterossi G, Costantini B, Scambia G, Fanfani F. Comparison of Different Near-Infrared Technologies to Detect Sentinel Lymph Node in Uterine Cancer: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(12):7377. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127377
Chicago/Turabian StyleRestaino, Stefano, Nicolò Bizzarri, Vincenzo Tarantino, Silvia Pelligra, Rossana Moroni, Emilia Palmieri, Giorgia Monterossi, Barbara Costantini, Giovanni Scambia, and Francesco Fanfani. 2022. "Comparison of Different Near-Infrared Technologies to Detect Sentinel Lymph Node in Uterine Cancer: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 12: 7377. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127377
APA StyleRestaino, S., Bizzarri, N., Tarantino, V., Pelligra, S., Moroni, R., Palmieri, E., Monterossi, G., Costantini, B., Scambia, G., & Fanfani, F. (2022). Comparison of Different Near-Infrared Technologies to Detect Sentinel Lymph Node in Uterine Cancer: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(12), 7377. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127377