-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Pathologic Protocols for Sentinel Lymph Nodes Ultrastaging in Cervical Cancer
P. Dundr, D. Cibula, K. Němejcová, I. Tichá, M. Bártů, R. Jakša
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem, přehledy
Grantová podpora
NV16-31643A
MZ0
CEP - Centrální evidence projektů
Digitální knihovna NLK
Plný text - Článek
NLK
Free Medical Journals
od 1999
Freely Accessible Science Journals
od 1999
ProQuest Central
od 1996-03-01
CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost)
od 2003-01-01
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
od 2003-01-01
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)
od 1996-03-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 1996-03-01
Public Health Database (ProQuest)
od 1996-03-01
- MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory děložního čípku * diagnóza MeSH
- protokoly protinádorové léčby * MeSH
- sentinelová uzlina patologie MeSH
- staging nádorů metody normy MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
CONTEXT.—: Ultrastaging of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) is a crucial aspect in the approach to SLN processing. No consensual protocol for pathologic ultrastaging has been approved by international societies to date. OBJECTIVE.—: To provide a review of the ultrastaging protocol and all its aspects related to the processing of SLNs in patients with cervical cancer. DATA SOURCES.—: In total, 127 publications reporting data from 9085 cases were identified in the literature. In 24% of studies, the information about SLN processing is entirely missing. No ultrastaging protocol was used in 7% of publications. When described, the differences in all aspects of SLN processing among the studies and institutions are substantial. This includes grossing of the SLN, which is not completely sliced and processed in almost 20% of studies. The reported protocols varied in all aspects of SLN processing, including the thickness of slices (range, 1-5 mm), the number of levels (range, 0-cut out until no tissue left), distance between the levels (range, 40-1000 μm), and number of sections per level (range, 1-5). CONCLUSIONS.—: We found substantial differences in protocols used for SLN pathologic ultrastaging, which can impact sensitivity for detection of micrometastases and even small macrometastases. Since the involvement of pelvic lymph nodes is the most important negative prognostic factor, such profound discrepancies influence the referral of patients to adjuvant radiotherapy and could potentially cause treatment failure. It is urgent that international societies agree on a consensual protocol before SLN biopsy without pelvic lymphadenectomy is introduced into routine clinical practice.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22006746
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230119135705.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220216s2019 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.5858/arpa.2019-0249-RA $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)31869245
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Dundr, Pavel, $u Institute of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $d 1971- $7 xx0080436
- 245 10
- $a Pathologic Protocols for Sentinel Lymph Nodes Ultrastaging in Cervical Cancer / $c P. Dundr, D. Cibula, K. Němejcová, I. Tichá, M. Bártů, R. Jakša
- 520 9_
- $a CONTEXT.—: Ultrastaging of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) is a crucial aspect in the approach to SLN processing. No consensual protocol for pathologic ultrastaging has been approved by international societies to date. OBJECTIVE.—: To provide a review of the ultrastaging protocol and all its aspects related to the processing of SLNs in patients with cervical cancer. DATA SOURCES.—: In total, 127 publications reporting data from 9085 cases were identified in the literature. In 24% of studies, the information about SLN processing is entirely missing. No ultrastaging protocol was used in 7% of publications. When described, the differences in all aspects of SLN processing among the studies and institutions are substantial. This includes grossing of the SLN, which is not completely sliced and processed in almost 20% of studies. The reported protocols varied in all aspects of SLN processing, including the thickness of slices (range, 1-5 mm), the number of levels (range, 0-cut out until no tissue left), distance between the levels (range, 40-1000 μm), and number of sections per level (range, 1-5). CONCLUSIONS.—: We found substantial differences in protocols used for SLN pathologic ultrastaging, which can impact sensitivity for detection of micrometastases and even small macrometastases. Since the involvement of pelvic lymph nodes is the most important negative prognostic factor, such profound discrepancies influence the referral of patients to adjuvant radiotherapy and could potentially cause treatment failure. It is urgent that international societies agree on a consensual protocol before SLN biopsy without pelvic lymphadenectomy is introduced into routine clinical practice.
- 650 17
- $a nádory děložního čípku $x diagnóza $7 D002583 $2 czmesh
- 650 17
- $a protokoly protinádorové léčby $7 D024221 $2 czmesh
- 650 _7
- $a sentinelová uzlina $x patologie $7 D000071036 $2 czmesh
- 650 _7
- $a staging nádorů $x metody $x normy $7 D009367 $2 czmesh
- 650 _7
- $a lidé $7 D006801 $2 czmesh
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _7
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485 $2 czmesh
- 655 _7
- $a přehledy $7 D016454 $2 czmesh
- 700 1_
- $a Cibula, David, $u Gynecologic Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $d 1968- $7 jo20000074072
- 700 1_
- $a Němejcová, Kristýna $u Institute of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $7 xx0233214
- 700 1_
- $a Stružinská, Ivana $u Institute of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $7 xx0137560
- 700 1_
- $a Bártů, Michaela $u Institute of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $7 xx0233216
- 700 1_
- $a Jakša, Radek $u Institute of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic $7 xx026017301
- 773 0_
- $w MED00000558 $t Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine $x 1543-2165 $g č. - (2019)
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31869245 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220216 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230119135658 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a kom $b bmc $g 1760730 $s 1157918
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $c - $e 20191223 $i 1543-2165 $m Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine $n Arch Pathol Lab Med $x MED00000558
- GRA __
- $a NV16-31643A $p MZ0
- LZP __
- $c NLK120 $d 20230119 $a 2021-granty