Is sentinel lymph node biopsy of therapeutic relevance for melanoma?

It is still unclear whether sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has an effect on the survival or recurrence-free survival of patients. It would be necessary to compare patients with SLNB (or with selective lymph node dissection in the case of positive SLNB) and patients without SLNB who received only a close clinical and sonographic follow-up. To date, no results from prospective, randomized studies of SLNB are available.

Patients with SLNB (n = 283) and patients in clinical stage I and II with close follow-up examinations only (n = 3,514) were studied retrospectively in this investigation with regard to prognostic factors established in the literature: sex, age, tumor thickness, histological tumor type, ulceration and localization.

Multivariate analysis did not show an independent significant advantage with regard to survival when SLNB had been performed (p = 0.37). Compared with patients in clinical stage I and II with close follow-up only (n = 2,617),patients in stage I and II with negative SLNB (n = 238) had no significantly lower melanoma-related mortality (p =0.36) but significantly fewer recurrences in the regional lymph node area (p = 0.0015). With regard to survival without distant metastases and disease-specific survival, patients with positive SLNB (n = 33) did not significantly benefit by comparison with patients who developed lymph node metastasis identified clinically or sonographically later during follow-up examinations (n = 246; p =0.89 and p = 0.38, respectively).

In the relatively short follow-up period after SLNB, patients for whom SLNB had been performed did not have - on the whole - a prognostic advantage over patients who were subject only to close follow-up monitoring. Patients for whom subclinical lymph node metastases had been removed as the result of a positive SLNB did not have a better prognosis than patients without SLNB who had developed lymph node metastases within the follow-up period [corrected]