title: [Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: prognostic value and disadvantages in 300 patients].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with cutaneous melanoma.
  
  
  METHODS
  Descriptive follow-up study.
  
  
  METHODS
  In the period 1995-2004, 300 patients with cutaneous melanoma (Breslow thickness: > or = 1.0 mm) underwent SLNB and, in case of a tumour-positive result, regional lymph node dissection. Results of the SLNB procedure, postoperative complications, follow-up, recurrences, disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were evaluated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The SLNB detection rate was 99%. 85 patients had a tumour-positive SLNB (28%) and underwent completion regional lymph node dissection; 215 patients underwent SLNB alone. The rate of postoperative complications after SLNB was 7%. With a median follow up of 51 months, the false-negative rate was 11%. The recurrence rate was 23% (SLNB negative: 19%; SLNB positive 34%; p = 0.005). In-transit metastases were found in 4% of the SLNB-negative group and in 20% of the SLNB-positive group (p < 0.001). The 5-year disease-free survival and disease-specific survival rates were 79% and 86%, respectively, in SLNB-negative patients and 57% and 71%, respectively, in SLNB-positive patients. Multivariate analysis showed that the independent prognostic factors for disease-free survival were presence of ulceration (p < 0.001) and SLNB positivity (p < 0.01). Prognostic factors for overall survival were presence of ulceration (p < 0.001) and male sex (p < 0.05), but not the SLNB results. Multivariate analysis also showed that SLNB positivity (p < 0.001) and presence of ulceration (p < 0.01) were independent prognostic factors for developing in-transit metastases.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  SLNB in patients with cutaneous melanoma is still only of prognostic value since survival benefit is not proven. Disadvantages of SLNB were the false-negative rate, the possibility of an increased risk of in-transit metastases in SLNB-positive patients, and postoperative complications. These must be kept in mind when offering patients SLNB.
authors.affiliation: Afd. Chirurgische Oncologie, Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen, Postbus 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: de Vries
authors.forename: P L
authors.initials: PL
authors.lastname: Jager
authors.forename: A J H
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Suurmeijer
authors.forename: J T M
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Plukker
authors.forename: R J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: van Ginkel
authors.forename: H J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Hoekstra
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis / Q000175:diagnosis*; D008297:Male; D008545:Melanoma / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery; D008875:Middle Aged; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011379:Prognosis; D021701:Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy; D012878:Skin Neoplasms / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery; D016019:Survival Analysis