Background: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is the standard of care for breast cancer patients with non-palpable axillary lymph nodes. We evaluated the usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in preoperative detection of malignant SLNs. Methods: 50 patients with breast cancer (median age: 60 years) underwent a color power Doppler ultrasonography with intravenous contrast (Sonovue®) preoperatively, and findings suggestive of metastatic disease to the SLN were documented. The final histopathological report and the radiological preoperative record were compared. Finally, the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of this evolving diagnostic modality were calculated. Results: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound scan identified a negative SLN in the axilla of 27 patients and final histopathology was negative for 30 cases in total, so negative predictive value was calculated as 90% and positive predictive value was 75%. Overall sensitivity was 83.33% and specificity was 84.38%. Moreover, the ability of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to differentiate between SLN status was only statistically significantly correlated with the actual final histopathological report (p < 0.001), while successful ultrasound prediction was not correlated with any factor. Conclusions: SLN status can be evaluated preoperatively using contrast-enhanced color Doppler ultrasonography with high accuracy.

Keywords:
Ultrasonography, Contrast enhanced, Sentinel lymph node, Breast cancer
1.
Fisher B, Bauer M, Wickerham DL, et al.: Relation of number of positive axillary nodes to the prognosis of patients with primary breast cancer. An NSABP update. Cancer 1983;52:1551-1557.
2.
Barranger E, Dubernard G, Fleurence J, et al.: Subjective morbidity and quality of life after sentinel node biopsy and axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2005;92:17-22.
3.
Schwartz GF, Giuliano AE, Veronesi U: Proceedings of the consensus conference on the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in carcinoma of the breast April 19 to 22, 2001, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Hum Pathol 2002;33:579-589.
4.
de Freitas R Jr, Costa MV, Schneider SV, et al.: Accuracy of ultrasound and clinical examination in the diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1991;17:240-244.
5.
Sacre RA: Clinical evaluation of axillar lymph nodes compared to surgical and pathological findings. Eur J Surg Oncol 1986;12:169-173.
6.
Alvarez S, Anorbe E, Alcorta P, et al.: Role of sonography in the diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer: a systematic review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1342-1348.
7.
Xu HX: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: The evolving applications. World J Radiol 2009;1:15-24.
8.
Ashikaga T, Krag DN, Land SR, et al.: Morbidity results from the NSABP B-32 trial comparing sentinel lymph node dissection versus axillary dissection. J Surg Oncol 2010;102:111-118.
9.
Sato K, Tamaki K, Tsuda H, et al.: Utility of axillary ultrasound examination to select breast cancer patients suited for optimal sentinel node biopsy. Am J Surg 2004;187:679-683.
10.
Yuan Z, Quan J, Yunxiao Z, et al.: Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound parametric imaging in breast tumors. J Breast Cancer 2013;16:208-213.
11.
Moritz JD, Ludwig A, Oestmann JW: Contrast-enhanced color Doppler sonography for evaluation of enlarged cervical lymph nodes in head and neck tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1279-1284.
12.
Valente SA, Levine GM, Silverstein MJ, et al.: Accuracy of predicting axillary lymph node positivity by physical examination, mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:1825-1830.
13.
Britton PD, Goud A, Godward S, et al.: Use of ultrasound-guided axillary node core biopsy in staging of early breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2009;19:561-569.
14.
Garcia-Ortega MJ, Benito MA, Vahamonde EF, et al.: Pretreatment axillary ultrasonography and core biopsy in patients with suspected breast cancer: Diagnostic accuracy and impact on management. Eur J Radiol 2011;79:64-72.
15.
Bonnema J, van Geel AN, van Ooijen B, et al.: Ultrasound-guided aspiration biopsy for detection of nonpalpable axillary node metastases in breast cancer patients: New diagnostic method. World J Surg 1997;21:270-274.
16.
Santamaria G, Velasco M, Farre X, et al.: Power Doppler sonography of invasive breast carcinoma: Does tumor vascularization contribute to prediction of axillary status? Radiology 2005;234:374-380.
17.
Ouyang Q, Chen L, Zhao H, et al.: Detecting metastasis of lymph nodes and predicting aggressiveness in patients with breast carcinomas. J Ultrasound Med 2010;29:343-352.
18.
Du J, Li FH, Fang H, et al.: Microvascular architecture of breast lesions: Evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic micro flow imaging. J Ultrasound Med 2008;27:833-842; quiz 844.
19.
Yang WT, Metreweli C, Lam PK, Chang J: Benign and malignant breast masses and axillary nodes: Evaluation with echo-enhanced color power Doppler US. Radiology 2001;220:795-802.
20.
Cui XW, Jenssen C, Saftoiu A, et al.: New ultrasound techniques for lymph node evaluation. World J Gastroenterol 2013;19:4850-4860.
21.
Altomare V, Guerriero G, Carino R, et al.: Axillary lymph node echo-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology enables breast cancer patients to avoid a sentinel lymph node biopsy. Preliminary experience and a review of the literature. Surg Today 2007;37:735-739.
22.
Verbanck J, Vandewiele I, De Winter H, et al.: Value of axillary ultrasonography and sonographically guided puncture of axillary nodes: A prospective study in 144 consecutive patients. J Clin Ultrasound 1997;25:53-56.
23.
Lyman GH, Temin S, Edge SB, et al.: Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1365-1383.
24.
Rubaltelli L, Corradin S, Dorigo A, et al.: Automated quantitative evaluation of lymph node perfusion on contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:977-983.
25.
Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al.: Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2011;305:569-575.
© 2015 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg
2015
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.