| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
ORIGINAL ARTICLES |
From the Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Louisville, James Graham Brown Cancer Center, and Center for Advanced Surgical Technology of Norton Hospital, Louisville, Kentucky (WRW, SLW, MJE, CC, VV, KMM); Department of Mathematics, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky (PBC); University of South Florida, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida (DSR); University of Texas, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (MIR); and LDS Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah (RDN).
Correspondence: Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Kelly M. McMasters, MD, PhD, University of Louisville, J. Graham Brown Cancer Center, 529 S. Jackson Street, Louisville, KY 40202; Fax: 502-629-3379; E-mail: kelly.mcmasters{at}nortonhealthcare.org
Background: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become widely accepted as a method of staging the regional lymph nodes for patients with melanoma. Although it is often stated that SLN biopsy is a minimally invasive procedure associated with few complications, a paucity of data exists to specifically determine the morbidity associated with this procedure. This analysis was performed to evaluate the morbidity associated with SLN biopsy compared with completion lymph node dissection (CLND).
Methods: Patients were enrolled in the Sunbelt Melanoma Trial, a prospective multi-institutional study of SLN biopsy for melanoma. Patients underwent SLN biopsy and were prospectively followed up for the development of complications associated with this technique. Patients who had evidence of nodal metastasis in the SLN underwent CLND. Complications associated with SLN biopsy alone were compared with those associated with SLN biopsy plus CLND.
Results: A total of 2120 patients were evaluated, with a median follow-up of 16 months. Overall, 96 (4.6%) of 2120 patients developed major or minor complications associated with SLN biopsy, whereas 103 (23.2%) of 444 patients experienced complications associated with SLN biopsy plus CLND. There were no deaths associated with either procedure.
Conclusions: SLN biopsy alone is associated with significantly less morbidity compared with SLN biopsy plus CLND.
Key Words: Melanoma • Sentinel lymph node • Morbidity • Complications • Lymph node dissection
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  K. Y. Bilimoria, C. M. Balch, D. J. Bentrem, M. S. Talamonti, C. Y. Ko, J. R. Lange, D. P. Winchester, and J. D. Wayne Complete Lymph Node Dissection for Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma: Assessment of Practice Patterns in the United States Ann. Surg. Oncol., June 1, 2008; 15(6): 1566 - 1576. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Lewis, J. S. Zager, D. Yu, D. Pelaez, A. I. Riker, S. Dessureault, C. W. Cruse, D. S. Reintgen, C. A. Puleo, and V. K. Sondak Full-Thickness Grafts Procured from Skin Overlying the Sentinel Lymph Node Basin; Reconstruction of Primary Cutaneous Malignancy Excision Defects Ann. Surg. Oncol., June 1, 2008; 15(6): 1733 - 1740. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. I. Ross and J. E. Gershenwald How Should We View the Results of the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-1 (MSLT-1)? Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2008; 15(3): 670 - 673. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Beavis, M. Dawson, P. Doble, R. A. Scolyer, R. Bourne, L.-X. L. Li, R. Murali, J. R. Stretch, C. L. Lean, R. F. Uren, et al. Confirmation of Sentinel Lymph Node Identity by Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy Samples Using Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2008; 15(3): 934 - 940. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Soo, P. Shen, R. Pichardo, H. Azzazy, J. H. Stewart, K. R. Geisinger, and E. A. Levine Intraoperative Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Metastatic Melanoma by Imprint Cytology Ann. Surg. Oncol., May 1, 2007; 14(5): 1612 - 1617. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Mocellin, A. Ambrosi, M. C. Montesco, M. Foletto, G. Zavagno, D. Nitti, M. Lise, and C. R. Rossi Support Vector Machine Learning Model for the Prediction of Sentinel Node Status in Patients With Cutaneous Melanoma Ann. Surg. Oncol., August 1, 2006; 13(8): 1113 - 1122. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. I. Ross Early-stage melanoma: staging criteria and prognostic modeling. Clin. Cancer Res., April 1, 2006; 12(7): 2312s - 2319s. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L. Wong, M. S. Brady, K. J. Busam, and D. G. Coit Results of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Patients With Thin Melanoma Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2006; 13(3): 302 - 309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Vaquerano, W. G. Kraybill, D. L. Driscoll, R. Cheney, and J. M. Kane III American Joint Committee on Cancer Clinical Stage as a Selection Criterion for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Thin Melanoma Ann. Surg. Oncol., February 1, 2006; 13(2): 198 - 204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. N. MacNeill, D. Ghazarian, D. McCready, and L. Rotstein Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Cutaneous Melanoma of the Head and Neck Ann. Surg. Oncol., September 1, 2005; 12(9): 726 - 732. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. G. Coit In-Transit Recurrence After Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Melanoma: Primum Non Nocere Ann. Surg. Oncol., August 1, 2005; 12(8): 575 - 578. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. B. Roaten, N. Pearlman, R. Gonzalez, R. Gonzalez, and M. D. McCarter Identifying Risk Factors for Complications Following Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Melanoma Arch Surg, January 1, 2005; 140(1): 85 - 89. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Tsao, M. B. Atkins, and A. J. Sober Management of Cutaneous Melanoma N. Engl. J. Med., September 2, 2004; 351(10): 998 - 1012. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. M. Pawlik, M. I. Ross, and J. E. Gershenwald Lymphatic Mapping in the Molecular Era Ann. Surg. Oncol., April 1, 2004; 11(4): 362 - 374. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
