Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer in North Africa: A Retrospective Analysis of Feasibility, Safety, and Morbidity Reduction in a Real-World Setting.

IF 2.1 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Aziz Belkhodja, Yasmine Chiba, Lamia Zaabar, Wissal Jaafar, Medemagh Malak, Mehdi Bouassida, Cherifa Ben Sethom, Nahed Khalifa, Manel Mabrouk, Aida Mhiri, Mechaal Mourali
{"title":"Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer in North Africa: A Retrospective Analysis of Feasibility, Safety, and Morbidity Reduction in a Real-World Setting.","authors":"Aziz Belkhodja, Yasmine Chiba, Lamia Zaabar, Wissal Jaafar, Medemagh Malak, Mehdi Bouassida, Cherifa Ben Sethom, Nahed Khalifa, Manel Mabrouk, Aida Mhiri, Mechaal Mourali","doi":"10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2025.2025-9-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Conventional axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) carries significant morbidity in breast cancer surgery. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) offers a less invasive alternative but lacks validation in resource-constrained environments. To compare postoperative morbidity between SLNB and ALND in breast cancer and assess SLNB feasibility.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted at the Mother-Child Department of Bizerte, Tunisia (January 2022-August 2024). Patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing SLNB or ALND were included. Primary outcomes were: lymphedema, lymphocele, pain [visual analog scale (VAS)], hemoglobin drop, and length of hospital stay. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v26.0. The Student's t-test was used for normally distributed quantitative variables, the Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed variables, and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables with small sample sizes. Normality was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 64 included patients, SLNB (<i>n</i> = 26) significantly reduced lymphedema (3.8% <i>vs.</i> 23%, <i>p</i> = 0.039), early postoperative pain (mean VAS: 3.92 <i>vs.</i> 4.7, <i>p</i> = 0.025), and length of hospital stay (5.69 <i>vs.</i> 7.71 days, <i>p</i> = 0.001) compared with ALND (<i>n</i> = 38). Lymphocele incidence was lower but not statistically significant (4% <i>vs.</i> 11; <i>p</i> = 0.640). The SLNB detection rate was 89%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SLNB significantly reduces postoperative morbidity compared with ALND and is feasible in this resource-limited North African setting. Our findings support its integration into routine breast cancer surgery as a safe and effective alternative to axillary dissection.</p>","PeriodicalId":93996,"journal":{"name":"European journal of breast health","volume":"22 1","pages":"61-65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12740283/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of breast health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2025.2025-9-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Conventional axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) carries significant morbidity in breast cancer surgery. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) offers a less invasive alternative but lacks validation in resource-constrained environments. To compare postoperative morbidity between SLNB and ALND in breast cancer and assess SLNB feasibility.

Materials and methods: A retrospective study was conducted at the Mother-Child Department of Bizerte, Tunisia (January 2022-August 2024). Patients with early-stage breast cancer undergoing SLNB or ALND were included. Primary outcomes were: lymphedema, lymphocele, pain [visual analog scale (VAS)], hemoglobin drop, and length of hospital stay. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS v26.0. The Student's t-test was used for normally distributed quantitative variables, the Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed variables, and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables with small sample sizes. Normality was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test.

Results: Among the 64 included patients, SLNB (n = 26) significantly reduced lymphedema (3.8% vs. 23%, p = 0.039), early postoperative pain (mean VAS: 3.92 vs. 4.7, p = 0.025), and length of hospital stay (5.69 vs. 7.71 days, p = 0.001) compared with ALND (n = 38). Lymphocele incidence was lower but not statistically significant (4% vs. 11; p = 0.640). The SLNB detection rate was 89%.

Conclusion: SLNB significantly reduces postoperative morbidity compared with ALND and is feasible in this resource-limited North African setting. Our findings support its integration into routine breast cancer surgery as a safe and effective alternative to axillary dissection.

Abstract Image

北非乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检:可行性、安全性和发病率降低的回顾性分析。
目的:常规腋窝淋巴结清扫术(ALND)在乳腺癌手术中发病率较高。前哨淋巴结活检(SLNB)提供了一种侵入性较小的替代方法,但在资源受限的环境中缺乏有效性。比较SLNB和ALND在乳腺癌术后的发病率,评估SLNB的可行性。材料和方法:回顾性研究于2022年1月至2024年8月在突尼斯比塞特母婴科进行。包括接受SLNB或ALND的早期乳腺癌患者。主要结局是:淋巴水肿、淋巴囊肿、疼痛[视觉模拟评分(VAS)]、血红蛋白下降和住院时间。采用SPSS v26.0进行统计分析。正态分布的定量变量采用学生t检验,非正态分布的变量采用Mann-Whitney U检验,小样本量的分类变量采用Fisher精确检验。使用Shapiro-Wilk检验评估正态性。结果:在纳入的64例患者中,SLNB (n = 26)与ALND (n = 38)相比,显著减少了淋巴水肿(3.8%对23%,p = 0.039)、术后早期疼痛(平均VAS: 3.92对4.7,p = 0.025)和住院时间(5.69对7.71天,p = 0.001)。淋巴囊肿发生率较低,但无统计学意义(4% vs. 11; p = 0.640)。SLNB的检出率为89%。结论:与ALND相比,SLNB显著降低了术后发病率,在资源有限的北非地区是可行的。我们的研究结果支持将其纳入常规乳腺癌手术,作为一种安全有效的替代腋窝清扫的方法。
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
CiteScore
2.60
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
小红书