...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Gynecologic Oncology >Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial and cervical cancer: a survey of practices and attitudes in gynecologic oncologists
【24h】

Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial and cervical cancer: a survey of practices and attitudes in gynecologic oncologists

机译:子宫内膜癌和子宫颈癌的前哨淋巴结作图:妇科肿瘤科医生的实践和态度调查

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective To determine patterns among gynecologic oncologists in sentinel lymph node mapping (SLNM) for endometrial cancer (EC) and cervical cancer (CC). Methods A online survey assessing the practice of SLNM, including incidence, patterns of usage, and reasons for non-use was distributed to Society of Gynecologic Oncology candidate and full members in August 2017. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis was performed. Results The 1,117 members were surveyed and 198 responses (17.7%) were received. Of the 70% (n=139) performing SLNM, the majority reported use for both CC and EC (64.0%) or EC alone (33.1%). In those using SLNM in EC, the majority (86.6%) performed SLNM in 50% of cases for all patients (56.3%), International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics grade 1 (43.0%) and 2 (42.2%). Reported benefits of SLNM in EC were reduced surgical morbidity (89.6%), lymphedema (85.2%), and operative time (63.7%). Among those using SLNM for CC, the majority (73.1%) did so in 50% of cases. In EC, 77.2% and 21.3% reported that micro-metastatic disease (0.2–2.0 cm) and isolated tumor cells (ITCs) should be treated as node positive, respectively. In those not using SLNM for EC (n=64) and CC (n=105), concerns were regarding efficacy of SLNM and lack of training. When queried regarding training, 73.7% felt that SLNM would impact skill in full lymphadenectomy (LND). Conclusion The SLNM is utilized frequently among gynecologic oncologists for EC and CC staging. Common reasons for non-uptake include uncertainty of current data, lack of training and technology. Concerns exist regarding impact of SLNM in fellowship training of LND.
机译:目的确定妇科肿瘤科医生在子宫内膜癌(EC)和宫颈癌(CC)的前哨淋巴结定位(SLNM)中的模式。方法于2017年8月向妇科肿瘤学会候选人和正式成员分发了一项在线调查,评估SLNM的实践情况,包括发病率,使用方式和不使用原因,并进行了描述性统计和单因素分析。结果共调查了1117名成员,收到198份回应(17.7%)。在执行SLNM的70%(n = 139)中,大多数报告同时使用CC和EC(64.0%)或单独使用EC(33.1%)。在EC中使用SLNM的患者中,大多数(86.6%)在所有患者中> 50%的病例(56.3%),国际妇产科联合会1级(43.0%)和2级(42.2%)的患者中进行了SLNM。报道的SLNM在EC中的益处是降低了手术发病率(89.6%),淋巴水肿(85.2%)和手术时间(63.7%)。在使用SLNM进行CC的患者中,大多数(73.1%)在> 50%的病例中这样做。在EC中,分别有77.2%和21.3%的人将微转移性疾病(0.2-2.0 cm)和孤立的肿瘤细胞(ITC)视为淋巴结阳性。在那些未将SLNM用于EC(n = 64)和CC(n = 105)的患者中,人们担心SLNM的有效性和缺乏培训。当询问培训时,有73.7%的人认为SLNM将影响全淋巴结清扫术(LND)的技能。结论SLNM被妇科肿瘤科医生广泛用于EC和CC分期。不使用的常见原因包括当前数据的不确定性,缺乏培训和技术。存在对SLNM在LND进修培训中的影响的担忧。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号