33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Role of the Plastic Surgeon in Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy of Internal Mammary Nodes

      case-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The presence of lymph node metastasis is the single most important prognostic factor in the staging of breast cancer. While the majority of lymphatic drainage of the breast is to the axillary nodes, the most common extra-axillary site of lymph drainage is the internal mammary chain (IMC). The primary method for assessing the tumor status of these nodes is a sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, which allows a surgeon to sample only the primary drainage sites of the tumor rather than performing a complete dissection of the nodal basin. Currently SLN biopsy is routinely used to determine axillary lymph node status in clinically node negative patients with breast cancer, however it is not commonly used to sample IMC SLNs [1]. Although there is much literature arguing for and against routine IMC SLNs, none specifically describe techniques for biopsy of these nodes, particularly when the nodes are more difficult to access. We believe that IMC SLN biopsies can alter the course of treatment and that the plastic surgeon, who has experience working in that difficult-to-navigate region of the thorax, is ideally equipped to perform them. A 47-year-old woman with a history of stage II (T2N0), estrogen receptor (ER) positive, progesterone receptor (PR) negative, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)/neu amplified left breast invasive ductal carcinoma in the lower inner quadrant presented with a new 4.2 cm magnetic resonance imaging-demonstrated mass in the lower outer quadrant. Her first cancer was treated with lumpectomy, axillary SLN biopsy, adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of adriamycin/cyclophosphamide followed by paclitaxel and 1 year of herceptin, and 60.8 Gy of adjuvant radiation therapy. After treatment she remained on tamoxifen. A core biopsy of the new mass showed triple negative invasive ductal carcinoma. She was treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisting of four cycles of gemcitabine and carboplatin with a minimal response. Three weeks before her mastectomy lymphoscintigraphy showed drainage to the internal mammary nodal basin, and biopsy was indicated to determine the need for adjuvant radiation therapy. Plastic surgery was consulted to perform the procedure. One day prior to surgery a dose of 01.05 mCi of 99m-technetium labeled sulfur colloid was given in 4 intradermal injections around the areola. In one hour 3 SLNs were visualized in the IMC (Fig. 1) using a dual head gamma camera (Brightview, Phillips, Andover, MA, USA). The overlying skin was marked. After induction of general anesthesia, 4 mL of methylene blue dye was injected subcutaneously and into the breast tissue in the retroareolar region, and the breast was massaged for ten minutes to promote drainage. A gamma ray detection probe (Navigator, RMD Instruments, Watertown MA, USA) revealed increased radioactivity in the medial superior left breast, a few centimeters lateral to the sternal border. Following the raising of skin flaps and resection of the breast tissue medially by the breast surgeon, the plastic surgeon (J.E.P.) performed the biopsy. The internal mammary vessels and adjacent lymph nodes were exposed by splitting the longitudinal fibers of the pectoralis major muscle. The anterior perichondrium of the second costal cartilage was scored and elevated off of the cartilaginous rib, and the rib was incised both laterally and medially using a 10-blade. To protect the underlying pleura, a Doyen was used to separate the posterior perichondrium from the underlying rib, which was then resected. The internal mammary vessels and nodes were exposed by carefully removing the posterior perichondrium. The gamma probe identified a single SLN. Lymph channels and nearby vessels were ligated using 4-0 silk ties, small clips and bipolar cautery, and the node was excised. There was no evidence of pleural violation. The posterior perichondrium was laid back over the vessels, the split in the pectoralis was repaired, and the breast surgeon completed the mastectomy. The pathology report showed no involvement of the IMC SLN, staging the tumor as T2N0M0, and the decision was made to forgo additional radiation therapy. There were no perioperative complications. Two months later she underwent prophylactic right mastectomy and bilateral reconstruction. Debate exists over whether routine IMC SLN biopsy is appropriate. Studies have shown that complete IMC node dissection showed no improvement in survival; however, these studies primarily contained patients with tumors in the lateral quadrants, which are less likely to drain to the IMC, and the studies were underpowered with regards to patients with tumor drainage to the parasternal region [2]. Physicians opposed to routine IMC SLN biopsy argue that the only significant treatment change from identifying a positive IMC node is in adjuvant locoregional radiation therapy, which has not been proven to significantly alter survival and can lead to significant morbidities such as radiation pneumonitis and cardiac compromise [3]. However, in the case of a positive IMC node, loco-regional radiation therapy does increase survival rates [4], and if it is negative, as it was in our patient, the side effects of radiation can be avoided. Additionally several physicians consider a positive IMC node an indication for adjuvant systemic therapy [1 4]. Studies performed by breast surgeons have reported that they never resect a rib to access IMC nodes due to increased morbidity [1 5]. Plastic surgeons perform this procedure frequently when preparing recipient vessels during breast reconstruction, and can comfortably perform the same procedure to access the IMC SLN immediately following a mastectomy. In the more difficult case where there is not a mastectomy, the use of the vertical mastopexy incision can allow access to the rib cartilage and the IMC without creating a parasternal incision, which would cause an unsightly scar. For these reasons, a plastic surgeon performs SLNB of IMC nodes at our institution. This case demonstrates the safety and efficacy of IMC SLN node biopsy when done by the reconstructive plastic surgeon, and how knowledge of IMC nodal status can influence the course of treatment. In a multidisciplinary approach to the treatment of breast cancer, the plastic surgeon is responsible for reconstruction but can also be instrumental in determining staging and treatment. IMC SLN biopsy is an important technique in the evaluation of early breast cancer in select patients, and we believe that the plastic surgeon has the ideal skill set to perform it safely and effectively.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Should the hunt for internal mammary chain sentinel nodes begin? An evaluation of 150 breast cancer patients.

          The aim of this study was to determine the visualization rate, identification rate, and clinical implications of biopsy of sentinel nodes in the internal mammary chain (IMC) in patients with breast cancer. From January 1999 to December 2002, 691 sentinel node procedures were performed. Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy was performed after injection of (99m)Tc-labeled nanocolloid into the tumor (.2 mL; 115 MBq; 3.1 mCi). The sentinel node was surgically identified with the aid of patent blue dye and a gamma ray detection probe. The sentinel node in the IMC could be harvested in 130 (87%) of the 150 patients in whom it was visualized on the images and contained metastases in 22 (17%) of these 130 cases. In nine patients (7%), the IMC sentinel node was tumor positive, whereas the axilla was tumor-free. Stage migration was seen in all patients with a tumor-positive IMC sentinel node (17%). There was a change of management in 38 (29%) of the 130 patients: institution or omission of radiotherapy to the IMC, adjuvant systemic therapy, or omission of an axillary lymph node dissection. Pursuit of IMC sentinel nodes improves the staging of patients with breast cancer and enables treatment to be better adjusted to the needs of the individual patient.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Impact on Post-surgical Treatment of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy of Internal Mammary Lymph Nodes in Patients with Breast Cancer

            Background Since the introduction of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in breast cancer patients there is a renewed interest in lymphatic drainage to the internal mammary (IM) chain nodes. We evaluated the frequency of lymphatic drainage to the IM chain, the rate of SLNs that contain metastases and the clinical implications of IM LN metastases. Methods Between June 1999 and April 2005 506 consecutive patients underwent SLN biopsy as a staging procedure for clinically T1-2N0 breast cancer. In all patients preoperative lymphoscintigraphy was combined with the intraoperative use of a gammaprobe. In patients with IM SLNs visualized on lymphoscintigraphy, LNs were extirpated through an intercostal parasternal incision. Results SLNs were visualized by preoperative lymphoscintigraphy in 99% of all patients (502/506): axillary SLNs in 499 patients (99%), ipsilateral IM LNs in 109 patients (22%). In 85 patients with visualized IM SLNs the IM nodes could be removed (78%). In 20 of the latter 85 patients IM SLNs contained metastases (24%). IM metastases were associated with axillary LN metastases (P < 0.001). In 17 patients IM metastases led to extension of the radiotherapy field, while additional (adjuvant) systemic therapy was given in six patients. Conclusion SLNs in the IM chain are common in breast cancer patients and can be extirpated in the majority of these patients. The proportion of patients in whom radiotherapeutic treatment was adjusted due to IM LN metastases was substantial. We advocate retrieval of IM SLNs when visualized by preoperative lymphoscintigraphy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sentinel lymph node biopsy of the internal mammary chain in breast cancer

              Routine removal of the internal mammary chain (IMC) sentinel node in breast cancer patients remains a subject of discussion. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of routinely performed IMC sentinel node biopsy on the systemic and locoregional treatments plan. All patients with biopsy proven breast cancer who underwent a sentinel node procedure between 2002 and 2011 were included in a prospective database. In cases of IMC drainage, successful exploration of the IMC (i.e., sentinel node removed) and surgical complications were registered. If the removed sentinel node contained malignant cells we determined if this altered the treatment plan when practising the current guidelines. In total, 119 of the 493 included patients showed IMC drainage on lymphoscintigraphy. Exploration of the IMC was performed in 107 (89 %) patients; in 86/107 (80 %) exploration was successful. In 14/107 patients (13 %) the IMC sentinel node was tumor positive. Macro and micro metastases were found in eight and six patients, respectively. In the group of patients who underwent surgical exploration of the IMC, systemic treatment was changed in none, radiotherapy treatment in 13/107 patients (11 %). Routine sentinel node biopsy of the IMC does not alter the systemic treatment. Radiotherapy treatment is altered in a small proportion of the patients; however, solid scientific evidence for this adjustment is lacking.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Arch Plast Surg
                Arch Plast Surg
                APS
                Archives of Plastic Surgery
                The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons
                2234-6163
                2234-6171
                July 2015
                14 July 2015
                : 42
                : 4
                : 497-499
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
                [2 ]Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Julie E Park. Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences, 5841 S. Maryland Ave., Rm. J-641, MC6035, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. Tel: +1-773-702-6302, Fax: +1-773-702-1634, jpark@ 123456surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
                Article
                10.5999/aps.2015.42.4.497
                4513064
                02e0670f-f72f-426e-a7f6-5ba152dfc852
                Copyright © 2015 The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 09 February 2015
                : 23 March 2015
                : 21 April 2015
                Categories
                Image

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article