首页> 外文期刊>Canadian journal of surgery: Journal canadien de chirurgie >Practice patterns of lymph-node mapping and sentinel-node biopsy for breast cancer in British Columbia.
【24h】

Practice patterns of lymph-node mapping and sentinel-node biopsy for breast cancer in British Columbia.

机译:不列颠哥伦比亚省乳腺癌淋巴结定位和前哨淋巴结活检的实践模式。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION: Because there is no standardized technique for mapping of lymph nodes and no optimal technique for evaluating the sentinel node, we decided to evaluate practice patterns for sentinel-node biopsy (SNB) for breast cancer in British Columbia 5 years after its introduction in 1996. METHODS: We carried out mail and telephone surveys of general surgeons performing at least 1 SNB (n = 28) or not performing SNB (n = 50), and carried out telephone surveys or on-site visits with pathologists (n = 7) and nuclear medicine physicians (n = 5) from institutions supporting SNB in the province. We collected data on training, perceived indications and techniques for the surgical, imaging and pathologic assessments of SNB to obtain data on practice patterns in 2001 and the degree of consistency among surgeons and institutions involved in performing SNB and reasons for not adopting the SNB technique. RESULTS: By 2001, SNB was incorporated into the practice of 19% of surgeons (28 of 150) performing breast cancer surgery in British Columbia. The survey response rate among SNB surgeons was 89% (25 of 28). Twelve (48%) of the 25 surgeons implemented SNB in the context of a validation study. Ten (40%) of the 25 had no data management support to monitor their results. Surgical training included intraoperative mentoring alone (48%), formal training courses alone (20%), both (24%) and self-teaching (8%). One-third of the surgeons had performed fewer than 10 procedures. Five surgeons had abandoned routine axillary dissection. There was considerable variation regarding the indications for SNB, definition of a sentinel node and surgical techniques. All nuclear medicine departments had a written lymphatic mapping protocol, but each used a different volume and activity of radiotracer. Immunohistochemical evaluation of the sentinel nodes was performed at just 3 pathology laboratories. The survey response rate from surgeons not practising SNB was 54% (27 of 50). Among 24 responders in active practice, 7 (29%) planned to perform SNB; 79% had not decided on the SNB indications. Lack of operating room time was a major limiting factor. CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable variation in the surgical, nuclear medicine and pathology techniques for SNB in the absence of a planned approach for its implementation in British Columbia. Developing consensus around written guidelines for the indications and techniques of SNB may reduce this variation.
机译:简介:由于目前尚无标准化的淋巴结作图技术,也没有评估前哨淋巴结的最佳技术,因此我们决定在1996年推出的不列颠哥伦比亚省乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检(SNB)的实践模式进行评估方法:我们对执行至少1个SNB(n = 28)或未执行SNB(n = 50)的普通外科医生进行了邮件和电话调查,并与病理学家进行了电话调查或现场访问(n = 7)来自该省支持SNB的机构的核医学医师(n = 5)。我们收集了有关SNB的手术,影像学和病理学评估的培训,感知适应症和技术的数据,以获取2001年的实践模式数据以及参与SNB的外科医生和机构之间的一致性程度以及不采用SNB技术的原因。结果:到2001年,SNB被纳入不列颠哥伦比亚省从事乳腺癌手术的19%外科医生(150名中的28名)的执业中。 SNB外科医生的调查答复率为89%(28个样本中的25个)。 25名外科医生中有12名(48%)在验证研究的背景下实施了SNB。 25个中有10个(40%)没有数据管理支持来监视其结果。外科手术培训包括仅术中指导(48%),仅正规培训课程(20%),两者(24%)和自学(8%)。三分之一的外科医生执行的手术少于10次。五名外科医生放弃了常规的腋窝清扫术。关于SNB的适应症,前哨淋巴结的定义和手术技术存在很大差异。所有核医学部门都有书面的淋巴图谱协议,但每个部门使用的放射性示踪剂的量和活性均不同。前哨淋巴结的免疫组织化学评估仅在3个病理实验室进行。来自未实践SNB的外科医生的调查答复率为54%(50中的27)。在积极实践的24位响应者中,有7位(29%)计划执行SNB。 79%尚未决定SNB适应症。缺乏手术室时间是主要的限制因素。结论:SNB的手术,核医学和病理学技术存在很大差异,因为尚无计划在卑诗省实施的方法。围绕SNB的适应症和技术的书面指南达成共识可以减少这种差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号