-
Something wrong with this record ?
Current status of sentinel lymph node mapping in the management of endometrial cancer
Helena Robova, Lukas Rob, Michael Jiri Halaska, Marek Pluta, Petr Skapa
Language English Country England, Great Britain
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review
Grant support
NT11424
MZ0
CEP Register
NLK
ProQuest Central
from 2001-06-01 to 2014-09-30
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2001-06-01 to 2014-09-30
Public Health Database (ProQuest)
from 2001-06-01 to 2014-09-30
PubMed
23259427
DOI
10.1586/era.12.157
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy methods MeSH
- Hysteroscopy methods MeSH
- Laparoscopy methods MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Lymph Node Excision methods MeSH
- Lymphatic Metastasis MeSH
- Endometrial Neoplasms diagnosis pathology MeSH
- Prognosis MeSH
- Robotics MeSH
- Neoplasm Staging MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Review MeSH
The prognosis of endometrial cancer (EC) is generally favorable, while lymph node status remains the most important prognostic factor. Sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) could help to find women in whom adjuvant therapy could be omitted. This review analyzes different techniques of injection and histopathologic elaboration of SLNM in EC. Results of studies on SLNM in ECs seem to be promising, but only a small series have been published so far. The studies are subdivided into three groups by the technique of injection (hysteroscopic, subserosal and cervical). Range of detection rate for SLNM varies from 45 to 100%. Hysteroscopic injection is not easy to learn; moreover, exact peritumoral injection in large tumors is often impossible. Subserosal administration of tracer is difficult during laparoscopic or robotic surgery. Cervical injection is quite a controversial technique because distribution of SLNs in ECs is different from cervical cancer; moreover, there is no large study using cervical injection with systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2nd Medical Faculty Charles University Prague Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc13024054
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20150116155228.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 130703s2013 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1586/era.12.157 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)23259427
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Robova, Helena $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2nd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Current status of sentinel lymph node mapping in the management of endometrial cancer / $c Helena Robova, Lukas Rob, Michael Jiri Halaska, Marek Pluta, Petr Skapa
- 520 9_
- $a The prognosis of endometrial cancer (EC) is generally favorable, while lymph node status remains the most important prognostic factor. Sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) could help to find women in whom adjuvant therapy could be omitted. This review analyzes different techniques of injection and histopathologic elaboration of SLNM in EC. Results of studies on SLNM in ECs seem to be promising, but only a small series have been published so far. The studies are subdivided into three groups by the technique of injection (hysteroscopic, subserosal and cervical). Range of detection rate for SLNM varies from 45 to 100%. Hysteroscopic injection is not easy to learn; moreover, exact peritumoral injection in large tumors is often impossible. Subserosal administration of tracer is difficult during laparoscopic or robotic surgery. Cervical injection is quite a controversial technique because distribution of SLNs in ECs is different from cervical cancer; moreover, there is no large study using cervical injection with systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy.
- 650 _2
- $a nádory endometria $x diagnóza $x patologie $7 D016889
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a hysteroskopie $x metody $7 D015907
- 650 _2
- $a laparoskopie $x metody $7 D010535
- 650 _2
- $a lymfadenektomie $x metody $7 D008197
- 650 _2
- $a lymfatické metastázy $7 D008207
- 650 _2
- $a staging nádorů $7 D009367
- 650 _2
- $a prognóza $7 D011379
- 650 _2
- $a robotika $7 D012371
- 650 _2
- $a biopsie sentinelové lymfatické uzliny $x metody $7 D021701
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Rob, Lukas $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2nd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Halaska, Michael Jiri $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2nd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Pluta, Marek $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2nd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Skapa, Petr $u Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, 2nd Medical Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00174405 $t Expert review of anticancer therapy $x 1744-8328 $g Roč. 13, č. 1 (2013), s. 55-61
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23259427 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20130703 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20150116155412 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 987734 $s 822434
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2013 $b 13 $c 1 $d 55-61 $i 1744-8328 $m Expert review of anticancer therapy $n Expert Rev Anticancer Ther $x MED00174405
- GRA __
- $a NT11424 $p MZ0
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20130703
