No funding source.
Less false-negative sentinel node procedures in melanoma patients with experience and proper collaboration†
Article first published online: 2 MAY 2011
Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Journal of Surgical Oncology
Volume 104, Issue 5, pages 454–457, 1 October 2011
How to Cite
Veenstra, H. J., Wouters, M. J.W.M., Kroon, B. B.R., Olmos, Renato. A. V. and Nieweg, O. E. (2011), Less false-negative sentinel node procedures in melanoma patients with experience and proper collaboration. J. Surg. Oncol., 104: 454–457. doi: 10.1002/jso.21967
- Issue published online: 6 SEP 2011
- Article first published online: 2 MAY 2011
- Manuscript Accepted: 6 APR 2011
- Manuscript Received: 22 OCT 2010
- skin malignancies;
- sentinel node biopsy;
Background and objectives
The aims of the study were to determine the percentage of false-negative sentinel node procedures in melanoma patients, to investigate the time cohort of these recurrences, whether a learning phase was involved and to search for causes of the failures.
Between December 1993 and December 2008, 708 melanoma patients underwent a sentinel node biopsy. The procedure was considered false-negative if a recurrence developed in the basin from which a tumor-free sentinel node had been removed. Of all false-negative cases, the pre-operative images, operative report and pathology slides were reviewed.
Sentinel node biopsy was positive in 164 (23%) of the patients and false-negative in 10 (1.4%), which results in a false-negative rate of 5.7%. Five of the 10 failures occurred in the first year after the sentinel node biopsy was introduced. Causes for these false-negative procedures could be attributed once to the nuclear medicine physician, once to the surgeon and twice to the pathologist.
The sentinel node procedure failed to identify involvement in 5.7% of the patients with lymph node metastases. Half of the false-negative biopsies took place in the first year after the procedure was introduced, illustrating the existence of a learning period. J. Surg. Oncol. 2011; 104:454–457. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.