Objective: We investigated the utility of Positron emission tomography-Computed tomography (PET-CT) in the setting of two different sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping techniques; the conventional cervical injection method (one-step) and the two-step method, which involves fundal injection followed by cervical injection. Methods: Patients with endometrial cancer undergoing FDG PET-CT followed by laparoscopic or robotic surgical staging with SLN mapping at the Yonsei Cancer Center between July 2014 and April 2021 were stratified into the PET-positive group (with suspected or likely lymph nodes metastasis) and PET-negative group. A chart review was performed for the number of harvested SLNs, patterns of SLN metastases, and recurrence. Results: Among 466 patients undergoing one-step (n = 276) and two-step (n = 190) SLN mapping, LN metastasis was identified in 21 of 434 PET-negative and 18 of 32 PET-positive patients. The sensitivity and specificity of PET-CT for diagnosing lymph node metastasis were 46.2% and 96.7%, respectively. Among PET-positive patients with LN metastasis, anatomical distribution was concordant in 14/18 patients (77.8%). Among PET-negative patients, four (2.3%) had metastatic para-aortic SLNs, including three (1.7%) with isolated para-aortic metastases; metastatic para-aortic SLNs were exclusively found in the two-step group. Among PET-positive patients, para-aortic SLN metastasis was identified in 35.7% of two-step and 16.7% of one-step group. Among the 21 PET false-negative patients, recurrence was seen in four patients (19%) after a median follow-up of 34 months (range: 7–70 months). Conclusions: PET-CT served as a useful guide to clinicians with high anatomical concordance rate in patients with LN metastasis. However, despite high specificity, sensitivity was limited. SLN metastasis pattern, especially at the para-aortic level, indicates that the two-step SLN technique might be useful in PET-negative and PET-positive patients.
|Number of pages||6|
|Publication status||Published - 2022 Sept|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: HI19C0481, HC21C0012 ).
© 2022 Elsevier Inc.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Obstetrics and Gynaecology