Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Dermal Versus Intraparenchymal Lymphoscintigraphy of the Breast

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

Abstract

Background and Objective: Dermal and intraparenchymal (IP) injections of radiocolloid have been used for lymphoscintigraphic identification of the sentinel node (SN) in breast cancer. Because of our institute’s extensive experience with dermal and IP lymphoscintigraphy for melanoma and breast cancer, we compared patterns of lymphatic migration after both types of injections to identify any differences in drainage patterns or SN identification.

Methods: Lymphoscintigrams (n = 31) after dermal injections in 30 patients with primary cutaneous melanoma on the breast were compared with lymphoscintigrams after IP injections in 97 consecutive patients with breast cancer. In each case, 400 μCi of filtered 99mTc-sulfur colloid was injected in four quadrants around the tumor or in the biopsy cavity. All lymphoscintigrams were reviewed for patterns of migration and SN location.

Results: Five of 31 (16%) dermal injections demonstrated bilateral axillary migration (n = 3) or a suprasternal SN (n = 2), neither of which was found with IP injections. Conversely, 3 of 97 (3%) IP injections demonstrated direct supraclavicular (n = 2) or costal margin (n = 1) nodes (P = .006), neither of which was found with dermal injections. Low axillary SNs were noted after 26 (84%) dermal and 93 (96%) IP injections (P = .037). The incidence of extra-axillary SNs was 26% (8 of 31) in the dermal group but only 5% (5 of 97) in the IP group (P = .0027).

Conclusion: There is a significant difference in lymphatic drainage and SN localization between dermal and IP lymphoscintigraphy. This finding has implications for injection techniques when lymphatic mapping of the SN is undertaken to stage a breast carcinoma.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Robinson DS, Samkple WF, Fee JH, et al. Regional lymphatic drainage in primary malignant melanoma of the trunk determined by colloidal gold scanning. Surg Forum 1977; 28: 147–8.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Morton DL, WenD-R, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992; 127: 392–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Giuliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan M, Statman R. Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 2345–50.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer: a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 941–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Roumen RMH, Valkenburg JGM, Geuskens LM. Lymphoscintigraphy and feasibility of sentinel node biopsy in 83 patients with primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1997; 23: 495–502.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet 1977; 349: 1864–7.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Comans EF, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: guidelines and pitfalls of lymphoscintigraphy and gamma probe detection. J Am Coll Surg 1998; 186: 275–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM, et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 1998; 227: 645–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kern K. Sentinel lymph node mapping in breast cancer using subareolar injection of blue dye. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 189: 539–45.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Van der Ent FWC, Kengen RAM, van der Pol HAG, Hoofwijk AGM. Sentinel node biopsy in 70 unselected patients with breast cancer: increased feasibility by using 10 mCi radiocolloid in combination with a blue dye tracer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999; 25: 24–9.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Borgstein PJ, Meijer S, Pijpers R. Intradermal blue dye to identify sentinel lymph node in breast cancer. Lancet 1997; 349: 1668–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Linehan DC, Hill ADK, Akhurst T, et al. Intradermal radiocolloid and intraparenchymal blue dye injection optimize sentinel node identification in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6: 450–4.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Klimberg VS, Rubio IT, Henry R, et al. Subareolar versus peritumoral injection for location of the sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg 1999; 229: 860–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Haigh PI, Hansen NM, Giuliano AE, et al. Factors affecting sentinel node localization during preoperative breast lymphoscintigraphy. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 1682–8.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Glass EC, Essner R, Morton DL. Kinetics of three lymphoscintigraphy agents in patients with cutaneous melanoma. J Nucl Med 1998; 39: 1185–90.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Uren RF, Howman-Giles RB, Thompson JF, et al. Mammary lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1775–80.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vendrell-Torne E, Setoain-Quinquer J, Domenech-Torne FM. Study of normal mammary lymphatic drainage using radioactive isotopes. J Nucl Med 1972; 13: 801–5.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Thompson JF, Uren RF, Shaw HM, et al. Location of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with cutaneous melanoma: new insights into lymphatic anatomy. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 189: 195–206.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Roumen RMH, Geuskens LM, Valkenburg JGH. In search of the true sentinel node by different injection techniques in breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999; 25: 347–51.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cicco CD, Cremonesi M, Luini A, et al. Lymphoscintigraphy and radioguided biopsy of the sentinel axillary node in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1998; 39: 2080–4.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Uren RF, Thompson JF, Howman-Giles R. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Lancet 1998; 352: 1471–3.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nieweg OE, Jansen L, Olmos RAV, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26(Suppl): S11–S16.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Glass EC, Essner R, Giuliano AE. Sentinel node localization in breast cancer. Semin Nucl Med 1999; 29: 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bennett LR, Lago G. Cutaneous lymphoscintigraphy in malignant melanoma. Semin Nucl Med 1983; 13: 61–9.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Turner-Warwick RT. The lymphatics of the breast. Br J Surg 1959; 46: 574–82.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hultborn KA, Larsson LG, Ragnhult I. The lymph drainage from the breast to the axillary and parasternal lymph nodes, studied with the aid of colloidal AU198. Acta Radiol 1955; 43: 52–64.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Morrow M, Foster RS. Staging of breast cancer: a new rationale for internal mammary node biopsy. Arch Surg 1981; 116: 748–51.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Borgstein PJ, Meijer S, Pijpers RJ, van Diest PJ. Functional lymphatic anatomy for sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer; echoes from the past and the periareolar blue method. Ann Surg 2000; 232: 81–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Greco N, et al. Prognosis of breast cancer patients after mastectomy and dissection of internal mammary nodes. Ann Surg 1985; 202: 702–7.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lacour J, LeM, Caceres E, et al. Radical mastectomy versus radical mastectomy plus internal mammary dissection. Cancer 1983; 51: 1941–3.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Veronesi U, Marubini E, Mariani L, et al. The dissection of internal mammary nodes does not improve the survival of breast cancer patients. 30-year results of a randomised trial. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35: 1320–5.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Breast Center, John Wayne Cancer Institute at Saint John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, California

    Perry Shen MD, Edwin C. Glass MD, L. Andrew DiFronzo MD & Armando E. Giuliano MD, FACS

  2. John Wayne Cancer Institute, 2200 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA, 90404

    Armando E. Giuliano MD, FACS

Authors
  1. Perry Shen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edwin C. Glass MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. Andrew DiFronzo MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Armando E. Giuliano MD, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Armando E. Giuliano MD, FACS.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shen, P., Glass, E.C., DiFronzo, L.A. et al. Dermal Versus Intraparenchymal Lymphoscintigraphy of the Breast. Ann Surg Oncol 8, 241–248 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0241-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0241-z

Key Words:

Search

Navigation