Cargando…
A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer
BACKGROUND: The lymph node status of a patient is a key determinate in staging, prognosis and adjuvant treatment of endometrial cancer. Despite this, the potential additional morbidity associated with lymphadenectomy makes its role controversial. This study systematically reviews the accuracy litera...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2008
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2409306/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18457596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-8-8 |
_version_ | 1782155743747637248 |
---|---|
author | Selman, Tara J Mann, Christopher H Zamora, Javier Khan, Khalid S |
author_facet | Selman, Tara J Mann, Christopher H Zamora, Javier Khan, Khalid S |
author_sort | Selman, Tara J |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The lymph node status of a patient is a key determinate in staging, prognosis and adjuvant treatment of endometrial cancer. Despite this, the potential additional morbidity associated with lymphadenectomy makes its role controversial. This study systematically reviews the accuracy literature on sentinel node biopsy; ultra sound scanning, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computer tomography (CT) for determining lymph node status in endometrial cancer. METHODS: Relevant articles were identified form MEDLINE (1966–2006), EMBASE (1980–2006), MEDION, the Cochrane library, hand searching of reference lists from primary articles and reviews, conference abstracts and contact with experts in the field. The review included 18 relevant primary studies (693 women). Data was extracted for study characteristics and quality. Bivariate random-effect model meta-analysis was used to estimate diagnostic accuracy of the various index tests. RESULTS: MRI (pooled positive LR 26.7, 95% CI 10.6 – 67.6 and negative LR 0.29 95% CI 0.17 – 0.49) and successful sentinel node biopsy (pooled positive LR 18.9 95% CI 6.7 – 53.2 and negative LR 0.22, 95% CI 0.1 – 0.48) were the most accurate tests. CT was not as accurate a test (pooled positive LR 3.8, 95% CI 2.0 – 7.3 and negative LR of 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 – 0.86. There was only one study that reported the use of ultrasound scanning. CONCLUSION: MRI and sentinel node biopsy have shown similar diagnostic accuracy in confirming lymph node status among women with primary endometrial cancer than CT scanning, although the comparisons made are indirect and hence subject to bias. MRI should be used in preference, in light of the ASTEC trial, because of its non invasive nature. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2409306 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2008 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-24093062008-06-04 A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer Selman, Tara J Mann, Christopher H Zamora, Javier Khan, Khalid S BMC Womens Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The lymph node status of a patient is a key determinate in staging, prognosis and adjuvant treatment of endometrial cancer. Despite this, the potential additional morbidity associated with lymphadenectomy makes its role controversial. This study systematically reviews the accuracy literature on sentinel node biopsy; ultra sound scanning, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computer tomography (CT) for determining lymph node status in endometrial cancer. METHODS: Relevant articles were identified form MEDLINE (1966–2006), EMBASE (1980–2006), MEDION, the Cochrane library, hand searching of reference lists from primary articles and reviews, conference abstracts and contact with experts in the field. The review included 18 relevant primary studies (693 women). Data was extracted for study characteristics and quality. Bivariate random-effect model meta-analysis was used to estimate diagnostic accuracy of the various index tests. RESULTS: MRI (pooled positive LR 26.7, 95% CI 10.6 – 67.6 and negative LR 0.29 95% CI 0.17 – 0.49) and successful sentinel node biopsy (pooled positive LR 18.9 95% CI 6.7 – 53.2 and negative LR 0.22, 95% CI 0.1 – 0.48) were the most accurate tests. CT was not as accurate a test (pooled positive LR 3.8, 95% CI 2.0 – 7.3 and negative LR of 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 – 0.86. There was only one study that reported the use of ultrasound scanning. CONCLUSION: MRI and sentinel node biopsy have shown similar diagnostic accuracy in confirming lymph node status among women with primary endometrial cancer than CT scanning, although the comparisons made are indirect and hence subject to bias. MRI should be used in preference, in light of the ASTEC trial, because of its non invasive nature. BioMed Central 2008-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC2409306/ /pubmed/18457596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-8-8 Text en Copyright © 2008 Selman et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Selman, Tara J Mann, Christopher H Zamora, Javier Khan, Khalid S A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title | A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title_full | A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title_fullStr | A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title_short | A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
title_sort | systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2409306/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18457596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-8-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT selmantaraj asystematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT mannchristopherh asystematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT zamorajavier asystematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT khankhalids asystematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT selmantaraj systematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT mannchristopherh systematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT zamorajavier systematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer AT khankhalids systematicreviewoftestsforlymphnodestatusinprimaryendometrialcancer |