Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma: results of 10 years’ experience in two regional training hospitals in the Netherlands

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and objective

The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-I) demonstrated that the sentinel node (SN) status in cutaneous melanoma affects prognosis and that completion lymphadenectomy in SN-positive patients may improve survival. Our objective was to evaluate sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in two regional hospitals in the Netherlands.

Methods

Patients with localized melanoma were planned for wide excision and SLNB. Completion lymphadenectomy was recommended for positive SN status. Data were compared with the MSLT-I.

Results

A median of 2 (1–7) SNs were identified in 305 patients and complications occurred in 11%. Fifty-four patients (18%) demonstrated SN metastases and 45 underwent completion lymphadenectomy (20% additional metastases). Six patients with initially negative SN developed lymph node metastases (sensitivity 90%). Overall disease-free survival was 83% (SN-negative 91% vs. SN-positive 41%; p < 0.001) and melanoma-specific survival was 93% (SN-negative 97% vs. SN-positive 62%; p < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed the SN status to be the most significant predictor for recurrence and melanoma-related death.

Conclusion

Our results of SLNB are comparable to data from high-volume centers participating in MSLT-I. From a patient perspective, the false-negative SN rate of 10% and complication rate of 11% should be weighed against being informed about prognosis and having a possible therapeutic benefit from completion lymphadenectomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

SN:

Sentinel node

SLNB:

Sentinel lymph node biopsy

LND:

Lymph node dissection

DFS:

Disease-free survival

DSS:

Disease-specific survival

References

  1. Richtig E, Gerger A, Berghold A et al (2007) Natural history of invasive cutaneous melanoma in Styria, Austria 2001–2003. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 5(4):293–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Balch CM, Soong SJ, Gershenwald JE et al (2001) Prognostic factors analysis of 17,600 melanoma patients: validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system. J Clin Oncol 19(16):3622–3634

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ et al (2003) New TNM melanoma staging system: linking biology and natural history to clinical outcomes. Semin Surg Oncol 21(1):43–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Drepper H, Kohler CO, Bastian B et al (1993) Benefit of elective lymph node dissection in subgroups of melanoma patients. Results of a multicenter study of 3616 patients. Cancer 72(3):741–749

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Baas PC, Schraffordt KH, Hoekstra HJ et al (1992) Groin dissection in the treatment of lower-extremity melanoma. Short-term and long-term morbidity. Arch Surg 127(3):281–286

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cascinelli N, Morabito A, Santinami M et al (1998) Immediate or delayed dissection of regional nodes in patients with melanoma of the trunk: a randomised trial. WHO Melanoma Programme. Lancet 351(9105):793–796

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Balch CM, Soong S, Ross MI et al (2000) Long-term results of a multi-institutional randomized trial comparing prognostic factors and surgical results for intermediate thickness melanomas (1.0 to 4.0 mm). Intergroup Melanoma Surgical Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 7(2):87–97

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH et al (1992) Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 127(4):392–399

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Statius Muller MG, van Leeuwen PA, de Lange-De Klerk ES et al (2001) The sentinel lymph node status is an important factor for predicting clinical outcome in patients with stage I or II cutaneous melanoma. Cancer 91(12):2401–2408

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Thompson JF, McCarthy WH, Bosch CM et al (1995) Sentinel lymph node status as an indicator of the presence of metastatic melanoma in regional lymph nodes. Melanoma Res 5(4):255–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. van der Veen H, Hoekstra OS, Paul MA et al (1994) Gamma probe-guided sentinel node biopsy to select patients with melanoma for lymphadenectomy. Br J Surg 81(12):1769–1770

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI et al (2001) Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: controversy despite widespread agreement. J Clin Oncol 19(11):2851–2855

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mohrle M, Schippert W, Rassner G et al (2004) Is sentinel lymph node biopsy of therapeutic relevance for melanoma? Dermatology 209(1):5–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Thomas JM (2007) Correspondence to the editor. Sentinel-node biopsy in melanoma. N Engl J Med 356(4):418–421

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Kroon BB (2004) High incidence of in-transit metastases after sentinel node biopsy in patients with melanoma. Br J Surg 91(10):1370–1371

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Thomas JM, Clark MA (2004) Selective lymphadenectomy in sentinel node-positive patients may increase the risk of local/in-transit recurrence in malignant melanoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 30(6):686–691

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ et al (2006) Sentinel-node biopsy or nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med 355(13):1307–1317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Balch CM, Soong SJ, Bartolucci AA et al (1996) Efficacy of an elective regional lymph node dissection of 1 to 4 mm thick melanomas for patients 60 years of age and younger. Ann Surg 224(3):255–263

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R et al (1999) Validation of the accuracy of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for early-stage melanoma: a multicenter trial. Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial Group. Ann Surg 230(4):453–463

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Centraal Beleidsorgaan voor de intercollegiale toetsing. http://www.cbo.nl/Downloads/322/rl_melanoomvdhuid_2005.pdf. Accessed 25 Aug 2008

  21. Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Valdes Olmos RA et al (2003) Review and evaluation of sentinel node procedures in 250 melanoma patients with a median follow-up of 6 years. Ann Surg Oncol 10(6):681–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Morton DL, Cochran AJ, Thompson JF et al (2005) Sentinel node biopsy for early-stage melanoma: accuracy and morbidity in MSLT-I, an international multicenter trial. Ann Surg 242(3):302–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. van Poll D, Thompson JF, Colman MH et al (2005) A sentinel node biopsy does not increase the incidence of in-transit metastasis in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 12(8):597–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kang JC, Wanek LA, Essner R et al (2005) Sentinel lymphadenectomy does not increase the incidence of in-transit metastases in primary melanoma. J Clin Oncol 23(21):4764–4770

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Molenkamp BG, Statius Muller MG, Vuylsteke RJ et al (2005) Selective lymphadenectomy in sentinel node-positive patients may increase the risk of local/in-transit recurrence in malignant melanoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 31(2):211–212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cascinelli N, Belli F, Santinami M et al (2000) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in cutaneous melanoma: the WHO Melanoma Program experience. Ann Surg Oncol 7(6):469–474

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ferrone CR, Panageas KS, Busam K et al (2002) Multivariate prognostic model for patients with thick cutaneous melanoma: importance of sentinel lymph node status. Ann Surg Oncol 9(7):637–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF et al (1999) Multi-institutional melanoma lymphatic mapping experience: the prognostic value of sentinel lymph node status in 612 stage I or II melanoma patients. J Clin Oncol 17(3):976–983

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Reintgen D, Pendas S, Jakub J et al (2004) National trials involving lymphatic mapping for melanoma: the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial, the Sunbelt Melanoma Trial, and the Florida Melanoma Trial. Semin Oncol 31(3):363–373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Westfries Gasthuis, Hoorn, The Netherlands

    Frank J. van den Broek & Jan-Willem D. de Waard

  2. Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, P.O. Box 7777, 5500 MB, Veldhoven, The Netherlands

    Pim C. Sloots & Rudi M. Roumen

Authors
  1. Frank J. van den Broek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pim C. Sloots
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan-Willem D. de Waard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rudi M. Roumen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rudi M. Roumen.

About this article

Cite this article

van den Broek, F.J., Sloots, P.C., de Waard, JW.D. et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma: results of 10 years’ experience in two regional training hospitals in the Netherlands. Int J Clin Oncol 18, 428–434 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0399-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-012-0399-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation