Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intraoperative Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Metastatic Melanoma by Imprint Cytology

  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLN) has revolutionized nodal staging. Accurate intraoperative evaluation of SLN permits a single procedure, with lymphadenectomy being performed during the initial operative procedure when the SLN is positive. There is a paucity of literature on intraoperative imprint cytology (IIC) evaluation of the SLN in melanoma. The purpose of this article is to present an update to our experience with IIC for SLN in melanoma.

Methods

Melanoma patients had SLNs examined by IIC. SLNs were bisected, and imprints were made from each half. Imprints were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and with Diff-Quik. Paraffin-embedded sections were examined with multiple hematoxylin and eosin–stained sections from the SLNs in conjunction with immunohistochemical staining for S-100, Melan-A, and HMB-45 proteins.

Results

Metastases were identified in 40 (17%) of 229 patients. Of these, 13 patients were detected by IIC (sensitivity, 33%). The negative predictive value was 88%. No false-positive results were identified (specificity, 100%). The positive predictive value was 100%. The accuracy of IIC was 78%. The sensitivity for detecting macrometastases (>2 mm) was better than that for detecting micrometastases (≤2 mm): 62% vs. 16% (P < .01). Patients with positive SLNs by IIC had lymphadenectomy under the same anesthetic. A total of 533 nonsentinel lymph nodes were identified in 42 patients. Only two patients (8%) had positive nonsentinel lymph nodes after a negative IIC.

Conclusions

IIC is a viable alternative to frozen sectioning when intraoperative evaluation is desired. IIC is significantly more sensitive for macrometastases. IIC evaluation of SLNs in melanoma makes a single operative procedure possible for a significant proportion of patients with regional nodal metastases.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

FIG. 1.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Thompson et al. Lancet 2005; 365:687–701

  2. Elias N, Tanabe K, Sober AJ, et al. Is completion lymphadenectomy after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma always necessary? Arch Surg 2004; 139:400–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Balch et al. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:3622–34

  4. Wrightson WR, Wong SL, Edwards MJ, et al. Complications associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:676–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Roberts AA, Cochran AJ. Pathologic analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in melanoma patients: current and future trends. J Surg Oncol 2004; 85:152–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992; 127:392–299

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chao C, Wong SL, Ross MI, et al. Patterns of early recurrence after sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma. Am J Surg 2002; 184:520–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Creager AJ, Shiver SA, Shen P, Geisinger KR, Levine EA. Intraoperative evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes for metastatic melanoma by imprint cytology. Cancer 2002; 94:3016–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hsu SM, Raine L, Fanger H. Use of avidin-biotin-peroxidase complex (ABC) in immunoperoxidase techniques: a comparison between ABC and unlabelled (PAP) procedures. J Histochem Cytochem 1981; 29:577–80

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 5th ed. New York: Lippincott-Raven, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tanis PJ, Boom RP, Koops HS, et al. Frozen section investigation of the sentinel node in malignant melanoma and breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8:222–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kelley SW, Komorowski RA, Dayer AM. Axillary sentinel lymph node examination in breast carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999;123:533–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Viale G, Bosari S, Mazzarol G, et al. Intraoperative examination of axillary sentinel nodes in breast carcinoma patients. Cancer 1999; 85:2433–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rahusen FD, Pijpers R, van Diest PJ, Bleichrodt RP, Torrenga H, Meijer S. The implementation of the sentinel node biopsy as a routine procedure for patients with breast cancer. Surgery 2000;128:6–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Weiser MR, Montgomery LL, Susnik B, Tan LK, Borgen PI, Cody HS. Is routine intraoperative frozen-section examination of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer worthwhile? Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7:651–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Flett MM, Going JJ, Stanton PD, Cooke TG. Sentinel node localization in patients with breast cancer. Br J Surg 1998; 85:991–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes. Lancet 1997; 349:1864–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu LH, Siziopikou KP, Gabram S, McClatchey KD. Evaluation of axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy by immunohistochemistry and multilevel sectioning in patients with breast carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124:1670–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hill AD, Tran KN, Akhurst T, et al. Lessons learned from 500 cases of lymphatic mapping for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1999; 229:528–35

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Turner RR, Hansen NM, Stern SL, Giuliano AE. Intraoperative examination of the sentinel lymph node for breast carcinoma staging. Am J Clin Pathol 1999; 112:627–34

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. van Diest PJ, Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Bleichrodt RP, Rahusen FD, Meijer S. Reliability of intraoperative frozen section and imprint cytological investigation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Histopathology 1999; 35:14–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Motomura K, Inaji H, Komoike Y, et al. Intraoperative sentinel node examination by imprint cytology and frozen sectioning during breast surgery. Br J Surg 2000; 87:597–601

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gibbs JF, Huang PP, Zhang PJ, Kraybill WG, Cheney R. Accuracy of pathologic techniques for the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma in sentinel lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6:699–704

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sabel MS, Gibbs JF, Cheney R, McKinley BP, Lee JS, Kraybill WG. Evolution of sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center. Surgery 2000; 128:556–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Koopal SA, Tiebosch AT, Albertus Piers D, Plukker JT, Schraffordt Koops H, Hoekstra HJ. Frozen section analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in melanoma patients. Cancer 2000;89:1720–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tanis PJ, Boom RO, Koops HS, et al. Frozen section investigation of the sentinel node in malignant melanoma and breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8:222–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Stojadinovic A, Allen PJ, Clary BM, Busam KJ, Coit DG. Value of frozen-section analysis of sentinel lymph nodes for primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. Ann Surg 2002; 235:92–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ariyan S, Ariyan C, Farber LR, Fischer DS, Flynn SD, Truini C. Reliability of identification of 655 sentinel lymph nodes in 263 consecutive patients with malignant melanoma. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 198:924–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Aryya NC, Khanna S, Shukla HS, Tripathi FM, Shukla VK. Role of rapid imprint cytology in the diagnosis of skin cancer and assessment of adequacy of excision. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 1992; 35:108–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Mielzynska I, Smok-Ragankiewicz A, Szczurek Z. Cytologic prints of primary and metastatic melanomas (in Polish). Patol Pol 1989; 40:181–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Fuchs U. Smear and imprint technique in malignant melanoma of the eye. Acta Ophthalmol 1988;66:445–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Shafir R, Hiss J, Tsur H, Bubis JJ. Imprint cytology in the intraoperative diagnosis of malignant melanoma. Acta Cytol 1983; 27:255–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dracopoulou I, Zambacos J, Lissaios B, Kouris A. The value of rapid imprint smears in the surgery of skin cancer. Acta Cytol 1976; 20:553–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Messina JL, Glass LF, Cruse CW, Berman C, Ku NN, Reintgen DS. Pathologic examination of the sentinel lymph node in malignant melanoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:686–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Messina JL, Glass LF. Pathologic examination of the sentinel node. J Fla Med Assoc 1997; 84:153–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Creager AJ, Geisinger KR, Perrier ND, et al. Intraoperative imprint cytologic evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes for lobular carcinoma of the breast. Annals Surg 2004;239:61–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Carson KF, Wen DR, Li PX, et al. Nodal nevi and cutaneous melanomas. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20:834–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Holt JB, Sangueza OP, Levine EA, et al. Nodal melanocytic nevi in sentinel lymph nodes. Correlation with melanoma-associated cutaneous nevi. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;121:58–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, et al. 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 1999; 6:976–83

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jansen L, Nieweg OE, Peterse JL, Hoefnagel CA, Olmos RA, Kroon BB. Reliability of sentinel lymph node biopsy for staging melanoma. Br J Surg 2000; 87:484–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Surgical Oncology Service and Department of Surgery, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Blvd., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157

    Victoria Soo BS, Perry Shen MD, John H. Stewart MD & Edward A. Levine MD

  2. Department of Pathology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157

    Rita Pichardo MD, Hossam Azzazy MD & Kim R. Geisinger MD

  3. Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157

    Rita Pichardo MD

Authors
  1. Victoria Soo BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Perry Shen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rita Pichardo MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hossam Azzazy MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John H. Stewart MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kim R. Geisinger MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Edward A. Levine MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward A. Levine MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soo, V., Shen, P., Pichardo, R. et al. Intraoperative Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Metastatic Melanoma by Imprint Cytology. Ann Surg Oncol 14, 1612–1617 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9272-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9272-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation