Outpatient revisits associated with three sentinel lymph node detection techniques for breast cancer: A propensity score weighted analysis

Michelle P. Sosa , Deirdre G. McNicholas , Arbelina B. Bebla , Seth Emont , Zhun Cao , Manu Tyagi , Craig Lipkin , Sommer Gunia
{"title":"Outpatient revisits associated with three sentinel lymph node detection techniques for breast cancer: A propensity score weighted analysis","authors":"Michelle P. Sosa ,&nbsp;Deirdre G. McNicholas ,&nbsp;Arbelina B. Bebla ,&nbsp;Seth Emont ,&nbsp;Zhun Cao ,&nbsp;Manu Tyagi ,&nbsp;Craig Lipkin ,&nbsp;Sommer Gunia","doi":"10.1016/j.cson.2025.100087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>This study evaluates whether near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) is associated with a lower outpatient (OP) revisit rate compared to isosulfan blue (IB) or methylene blue (MB) when combined with technetium-99m (Tc99m) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping of breast cancer.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>This retrospective observational study included adult female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis who underwent SLN mapping and had an index OP discharge between July 1, 2017 and August 31, 2022 ​at a U.S. hospital contributing to the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients were grouped by SLN mapping method: IB ​+ ​Tc99m, MB ​+ ​Tc99m, and ICG ​+ ​Tc99m. The primary outcome was OP revisit rates at 30, 60, and 90 days post-discharge. Propensity score weighting adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>5.6 ​% (n ​= ​60,068) of the 1,067,677 adult female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis underwent SLN mapping, and 54.9 ​% (n ​= ​32,970) met the inclusion criteria. In the propensity-weighted sample (n ​= ​2002), the ICG ​+ ​Tc99m cohort had the lowest OP revisit rates at all time points compared to IB ​+ ​Tc99m and MB ​+ ​Tc99m: at 30 days, 36.4 ​% vs. 43.1 ​% vs. 43.2 ​%; at 60 days, 50.9 ​% vs. 55.8 ​% vs. 56.2 ​%; and at 90 days, 55.9 ​% vs. 59.7 ​% vs. 60.0 ​% (all p ​&lt; ​.05). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) confirmed the ICG ​+ ​Tc99m cohort's reduced OP revisits: 30-day aOR, 0.74 (0.63–0.88); 60-day aOR, 0.80 (0.68–0.94); and 90-day aOR, 0.84 (0.71–0.99) (all p ​&lt; ​.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>NIRF with ICG ​+ ​Tc99m was associated with significantly fewer OP revisits, suggesting that this method may improve patient outcomes and the continuum of care for breast cancer patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100278,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Surgical Oncology","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100087"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773160X25000169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

This study evaluates whether near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) is associated with a lower outpatient (OP) revisit rate compared to isosulfan blue (IB) or methylene blue (MB) when combined with technetium-99m (Tc99m) for sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping of breast cancer.

Materials and methods

This retrospective observational study included adult female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis who underwent SLN mapping and had an index OP discharge between July 1, 2017 and August 31, 2022 ​at a U.S. hospital contributing to the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients were grouped by SLN mapping method: IB ​+ ​Tc99m, MB ​+ ​Tc99m, and ICG ​+ ​Tc99m. The primary outcome was OP revisit rates at 30, 60, and 90 days post-discharge. Propensity score weighting adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics.

Results

5.6 ​% (n ​= ​60,068) of the 1,067,677 adult female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis underwent SLN mapping, and 54.9 ​% (n ​= ​32,970) met the inclusion criteria. In the propensity-weighted sample (n ​= ​2002), the ICG ​+ ​Tc99m cohort had the lowest OP revisit rates at all time points compared to IB ​+ ​Tc99m and MB ​+ ​Tc99m: at 30 days, 36.4 ​% vs. 43.1 ​% vs. 43.2 ​%; at 60 days, 50.9 ​% vs. 55.8 ​% vs. 56.2 ​%; and at 90 days, 55.9 ​% vs. 59.7 ​% vs. 60.0 ​% (all p ​< ​.05). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) confirmed the ICG ​+ ​Tc99m cohort's reduced OP revisits: 30-day aOR, 0.74 (0.63–0.88); 60-day aOR, 0.80 (0.68–0.94); and 90-day aOR, 0.84 (0.71–0.99) (all p ​< ​.05).

Conclusion

NIRF with ICG ​+ ​Tc99m was associated with significantly fewer OP revisits, suggesting that this method may improve patient outcomes and the continuum of care for breast cancer patients.
与三种前哨淋巴结检测技术相关的门诊复诊:倾向评分加权分析
本研究评估近红外荧光(NIRF)成像与吲哚菁绿(ICG)相比,与异硫丹蓝(IB)或亚甲基蓝(MB)联合锝-99m (Tc99m)进行乳腺癌前哨淋巴结(SLN)定位时,是否与较低的门诊(OP)重访率相关。材料和方法本回顾性观察性研究纳入了2017年7月1日至2022年8月31日期间在美国一家医院接受SLN定位并有指数OP出院的乳腺癌成年女性患者,这些患者为Premier医疗数据库提供了资料。采用SLN作图法对患者进行分组:IB + Tc99m、MB + Tc99m、ICG + Tc99m。主要结果是出院后30,60和90天的OP重访率。结果在1,067,677例诊断为乳腺癌的成年女性患者中,5.6% (n = 60,068)进行了SLN定位,54.9% (n = 32,970)符合纳入标准。在倾向加权样本(n = 2002)中,与IB + Tc99m和MB + Tc99m相比,ICG + Tc99m队列在所有时间点的OP重访率最低:在30天,36.4%比43.1%比43.2%;60天,50.9% vs. 55.8% vs. 56.2%;在第90天,55.9% vs. 59.7% vs. 60.0% (p <;. 05)。调整后的优势比(aORs)证实ICG + tc9900万组的OP复诊次数减少:30天的aOR为0.74 (0.63-0.88);60天aOR为0.80 (0.68-0.94);90天aOR为0.84(0.71-0.99)(均p <;. 05)。结论ICG + Tc99m的nirf与OP复诊次数显著减少相关,提示该方法可改善患者预后和乳腺癌患者的持续护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信