Sentinel Lymph Node Detection Using SPECT and Gamma Probe in Low‐Risk Endometrial Cancer: Efficacy and Factors Associated With Detection Failure
2025

Sentinel Lymph Node Detection in Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer

Sample size: 97 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Asanoma Kazuo, Yahata Hideaki, Kodama Keisuke, Okugawa Kaoru, Yasunaga Masafumi, Onoyama Ichiro, Yagi Hiroshi, Maenohara Shoji, Hachisuga Kazuhisa, Isoda Takuro, Shimokawa Mototsugu, Ishigami Kousei, Oda Yoshinao, Kato Kiyoko

Primary Institution: Kyushu University Hospital

Hypothesis

What factors affect sentinel lymph node identification in patients with low-risk endometrial cancer?

Conclusion

The study found that age and body mass index (BMI) are significant factors associated with sentinel lymph node detection failure in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer.

Supporting Evidence

  • 39% of cases had unilateral detection failure with SPECT.
  • 24% of cases had unilateral detection failure with the gamma probe.
  • Age was significantly associated with SLN detection failure using SPECT.
  • BMI was significantly associated with SLN detection failure using the gamma probe.
  • Over 90% of detected SLNs were located in the external iliac or obturator area.

Takeaway

Doctors are trying to find the best way to see if cancer has spread in women with a certain type of cancer, and they found that older women and those with higher weight might have more trouble with this.

Methodology

This retrospective cohort study included 97 patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery with SPECT and gamma probe detection systems to identify sentinel lymph nodes.

Potential Biases

The uniformity of the cohort regarding disease aggressiveness may limit the generalizability of the findings.

Limitations

The study was limited to a small cohort from a single institute and focused only on low-risk cases.

Participant Demographics

Patients were women with endometrial endometrioid carcinoma Grade 1 or 2 at estimated Stage IA.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.0001

Confidence Interval

95% CI of 4.30–38.7 for age; 95% CI of 2.28–35.4 for BMI

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1111/ases.70015

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication