Logo
Logo


ISSN: 0300-9041
ISSNe: 2594-2034


Indizada en: SciELO, Índice Médico Latinoamericano, LILACS, Medline
Editada por la Federación Mexicana de Colegios de Obstetricia, y Ginecologia AC
Fundada por la Asociación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia en 1945
 

INFORMACIÓN EXCLUSIVA PARA LOS PROFESIONALES DE LA SALUD


Periodicidad: continua
Abreviatura: Ginecol Obstet Mex
ISSN: 0300-9041
ISSNe: 2594-2034
Indizada en: Scimago, Índice Médico Latinoamericano, Lilacs, Medline, Science Citation Index, Ulrich, Ebsco.

Ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama: técnica y factores pronósticos

Sentinel node in breast cancer: technique and prognosis factors.

Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2021; 89 (9): 688-695.

https://doi.org/10.24245/gom.v89i9.5698

Óscar Alejandro Bonilla-Sepúlveda

Mastólogo, Clínica Medellín, Grupo de Investigación en Cáncer IDC, Grupo de Investigaciones Biomédicas UniRemington, Medellín, Antioquia, Colombia.


Corrrespondencia:

Óscar Alejandro Bonilla Sepúlveda
mastologia.bonilla@gmail.com

Debe citarse como:

Bonilla-Sepúlveda OA. Ganglio centinela en cancer de mama: técnica y factores pronósticos. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2021; 89 (9): 688-695. https://doi.org/10.24245/gom.v89i9.5698

Resumen

OBJETIVO: Describir las características sociodemográficas, clínicas, técnica quirúrgica y factores pronósticos de la técnica del ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama en un centro de referencia.

MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio retrospectivo, analítico, con fuentes secundarias de información de mujeres con cáncer de mama sin afectación clínica axilar, llevadas a cirugía con biopsia de ganglio centinela, en el registro personal de un cirujano del 1 de mayo de 2018 al 31 de octubre de 2020, en un centro de referencia en Medellín, Colombia. Se recopilaron los datos demográficos, clínicos y paraclínicos y se analizaron con estadística descriptiva.

RESULTADOS: Se practicaron 552 cirugías axilares, 353 biopsias de ganglio centinela (63.9 %) y 199 linfadenectomías (36%). La edad media fue 60 años (DE ± 12.6). El 86.1% estaba en estadio clínico 0-I-II. El tamaño tumoral medio fue 2.6 cm. La tasa de detección del ganglio centinela fue de 98.3 % (n = 347). En promedio se resecaron 1.9 ganglios (DE ± 1.3) de los que 23.1% (n = 80) fueron metastásicos. Se evitó el vaciamiento axilar en el 83.6 % (n = 295).

CONCLUSIÓN: En esta muestra, la técnica del ganglio centinela para la estadificación axilar tuvo una alta tasa de detección, se encontró mayor afectación del ganglio centinela en el transcurso de la mastectomía, congelación, subtipos luminal A y B y en menor proporción en la quimioterapia preparatoria.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Ganglio centinela; cáncer de mama; axilar; biopsia de ganglio centinela; edad media; Colombia; mastectomía.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, surgical technique, and prognostic factors of the sentinel lymph node technique in breast cancer in a referral center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective, analytical study, with secondary sources of information of women with breast cancer without clinical axillary involvement, taken to surgery with sentinel node biopsy, in the personal registry of a surgeon from May 1, 2018, to October 31, 2020, in a referral center in Medellin, Colombia. Demographic, clinical and paraclinical data were collected and analyzed with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS: 552 axillary surgeries were performed, 353 sentinel node biopsies (63.9 %) and 199 lymphadenectomies (36%). The mean age was 60 years (SD ± 12.6). Clinical stage 0-I-II was 86.1%. The mean tumor size was 2.6 cm. The sentinel node detection rate was 98.3% (n = 347). On average 1.9 nodes were resected (SD ± 1.3) of which 23.1% (n = 80) were metastatic. Axillary emptying was avoided in 83.6% (n = 295).

CONCLUSION: In this sample, the sentinel node technique for axillary staging had a high detection rate, with greater sentinel node involvement found during mastectomy, freezing, luminal subtypes A and B and in a lower proportion in preparative chemotherapy.

KEYWORDS: Sentinel lymph node; Breast cancer; Axillary; Sentinel node biopsy; Middle aged; Colombia; Mastectomy.

    1. Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Mathers C, Parkin DM, Piñeros M, Znaor A, Bray F. Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2020: GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int J Cancer 2019; 144 (8): 1941-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.31937
    2. Tyagi NK, Dhesy-Thind S. Clinical practice guidelines in breast cancer. Curr Oncol 2018; 25 (11): 151-60. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.25.3729
    3. Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, Barton B, Borland D, Fisher ER, et al. Comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer. A first report of results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Cancer 1977; 39 (6) (1977): 2827-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197706)39:6<2827::AID-CNCR2820390671>3.0.CO;2-I
    4. De Cicco C, Cremonesi M, Luini A, Bartolomei M, Grana C, Prisco G, et al. Lymphoscintigraphy and radioguided biopsy of the sentinel axillary node in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1998; 39: 2080-84.
    5. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A Randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 349 (6): 546-553. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012782
    6. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, Goyal A, Newcombe RG, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98 (9): 599-609. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj158. Erratum in: J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98 (12): 876.
    7. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph node resection compared with conventional axillaryly mph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 927-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70207-2
    8. Canavese G, Catturich A, Vecchio C, et al. Sentinel node biopsy compared with complete axillary dissection for staging early breast cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes: results of randomized trial. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (6): 1001-7. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdn746
    9. Zavagno G, De Salvo GL, Scalco G, et al. A randomized clinical trial on sentinel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: Results of the sentinella/GIVOM Trial. Ann Surg 2008; 247 (2): 207-13. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31812e6a73
    10. Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 Randomized Trial. Ann Surg 2010; 252 (3): 426-33. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181f08f32
    11. Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, et al. Effect of axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection on 10-year overall survival among women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: The ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) Randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017; 318 (10): 918. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11470
    12. Donker M, van Tienhoven G, Straver ME, et al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15 (12): 1303-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70460-7
    13. Lyman GH, Somerfield MR, Bosserman LD, Perkins CL, Weaver DL, Giuliano AE. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35 (5): 561-64. doi:10.1200/JCO.2016.71.0947
    14. Perry F, Figueredo C, Ossa CA, Guzmán L, Castillo J, Ángel J, García O, Duarte C, García M, Díaz S, Lehmann C. Ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama: experiencia 2000-2010 en el Instituto Nacional de Cancerología de Colombia. Revista Colombiana de Cancerología 2012;16 (2): 84-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0123-9015(12)70019-7
    15. Hilton HN, Clarke CL, Graham JD. Estrogen and progesterone signalling in the normal breast and its implications for cancer development. Mol Cell Endocrinol 2018; 466: 2-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mce.2017.08.011
    16. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic Mapping and Sentinel Lymphadenectomy for Breast Cancer: Ann Surg 1994; 220 (3): 391-401. doi:10.1097/00000658-199409000-00015
    17. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox C, Yeatman T, Balducci L, Ku N, Shivers S, Berman C, Wells K, Rapaport D, Shons A, Horton J, Greenberg H, Nicosia S, Clark R, Cantor A, Reintgen DS. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA 1996; 276 (22): 1818-22. PMID: 8946902.
    18. Corrao F, Lorusso C, Orti R, et al. Ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama. Experiencia de 11 años del servicio de ginecología del HIBA. Rev Argent Mastol 2010; 29: 33-42.
    19. Kell MR, Burke JP, Barry M, et al. Outcome of axillary staging in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010; 120: 441-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0705-6
    20. Von Stecher F, Crimi G, Paesani F, et al. Experiencia en el estudio del ganglio centinela en cáncer de mama en CEMIC. Rev Argent Mastol 2010; 29: 276-85. https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/pt/lil-589417

Comentarios