Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 2, 2026
07:51
The Application of 1% Methylene Blue Dye As a Single Technique in Breast Cancer Sentinel Node Biopsy
Published on: June 1, 2019
Less false-negative sentinel node procedures in melanoma patients with experience and proper collaboration
Hidde J Veenstra1, Michel W J M Wouters, Michel J W M Wouters
1Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. h.veenstra@nki.nl
Journal of Surgical Oncology
|May 4, 2011
Summary
The sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has a 5.7% false-negative rate in melanoma patients. Failures often occurred during the initial learning phase, highlighting the need for careful technique and review.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Surgical Pathology
- Nuclear Medicine
Background:
- Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is crucial for melanoma staging.
- Accurate SLNB is vital to avoid understaging and guide treatment decisions.
Purpose of the Study:
- Determine the false-negative rate of SLNB in melanoma patients.
- Analyze the timing of false-negative recurrences and identify a learning curve.
- Investigate potential causes of SLNB failures.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 708 melanoma patients undergoing SLNB (1993-2008).
- Defined false-negative as recurrence in the basin of a tumor-free sentinel node.
- Detailed review of imaging, operative reports, and pathology for false-negative cases.
Main Results:
- A 5.7% false-negative rate was observed (10/164 positive SLNBs).
- Half of false-negative cases occurred within the first year of SLNB implementation.
- Attributed causes included errors by nuclear medicine physicians, surgeons, and pathologists.
Conclusions:
- SLNB can miss lymph node metastases in 5.7% of melanoma cases.
- A significant learning period exists for SLNB, with higher failure rates initially.
- Addressing procedural and interpretive errors is key to improving SLNB accuracy.
