Keywords
breast cancer - sentinel lymph node - indocyanine green - fluorescence - sentinel
lymph node excision
Introduction
In Germany, more than 70000 breast carcinomas are newly diagnosed every year [1]. At the time of diagnosis, 76% of affected patients have no axillary lymph node
metastases [2]. Axillary lymph node status is considered an important classic prognostic factor
for early breast cancer [3]. Axillary sentinel lymph node excision (SLNE) to determine node status is recommended
in cases with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer and cases undergoing
a mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) [4]. At the beginning of the 21st century, this became the standard approach, as it
offered the same level of oncological safety [5]
as complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) but resulted in a lower postoperative
morbidity (lymphedema, reduced quality of life, numbness/pain in the arm) [6]. Different tracers are injected into the breast, depending on the marking procedure.
After they have been transported along the lymphatic pathways, they make targeted
detection of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) possible. The standard approach recommended
in Germany is to mark the SLN using technetium colloid (99mTc) [7]. A meta-analysis of more than 8000 patients already carried out in 2006 was able
to confirm a detection rate (DR) for SLNs using 99mTc marking of 96.0% and a false negative rate (FNR) of 7.0%, although this meta-analysis
also included studies with dual SLN marking (99mTc and blue dye) [8]. Radionuclide marking requires cooperation with a nuclear medicine department (NMD)
to inject the tracer and, in some cases, this even necessitates the patient being
transported to the NMD as well as precise planning of the time of surgery due to the
limited half-life of 99mTc. One alternative, rated as + by the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO)
[7] which makes it possible to bypass these logistical challenges, is to use indocyanine
green (ICG) to mark SLNs. ICG is a water-soluble, metabolically neutral, tricarbocyanine
dye which fluoresces under near-infrared light. The ICG is injected by the surgeon
immediately prior to surgery. A meta-analysis of ten studies found a high DR for SLNs
after ICG marking which was comparable to that found for radionuclide marking [9]. It
should be noted, however, that in most of the studies published to date, ICG marking
was done in addition to conventional marking (radionuclide or blue dye) and was not
carried out by itself. Moreover, different doses of ICG and different camera systems
were used [10].
The current study aimed to determine the DR of axillary SLNs after marking with ICG
alone in patients with breast malignancies in the context of a standardized administration
scheme using a laparoscopy system suitable for ICG which was available in our institution.
The secondary goals of the study were to determine the rate of ICG-associated complications
and to compare the costs of ICG marking with those of 99mTc marking.
Material and Methods
Patient cohort
Patients with an initial diagnosis of invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in
situ (DCIS) diagnosed in the University Gynecology Hospital of Rostock between 09/2023
and 05/2024 whose primary surgical therapy required planned axillary SLNE were included
in this single-center prospective cohort study after giving their written informed
consent. The indication for SLNE was based on the recommendations of the AGO Breast
Commission which applied at the time of recruitment into the study. This means that
SLNE was indicated in patients with clinically node-negative disease, unless the patient
had inflammatory or distant metastatic breast cancer, was scheduled for breast-conserving
surgery for DCIS, or had already undergone SLNE or ALND in the context of prior disease
[7]. Based on the results of the SOUND study [11] and even before
this approach was included in the AGO recommendations, postmenopausal patients with
breast-conserving surgery were offered the option to forego SLNE if they had an invasive
hormone-receptor (HR) positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative
tumor with a maximum diameter of 2 cm. Exclusion criteria for the study were contraindications
for ICG administration (iodine, sodium iodide, or ICG intolerance, hyperthyroidism,
autonomous thyroid adenomas), primary systemic therapy, age ˂ 18 years, pregnancy,
lactation, and previous axillary surgery ([Fig. 1]). The Rostock University Medicine Ethics Committee approved the study (A2022–0161).
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the study. DCIS = ductal carcinoma in situ; SLNE = sentinel lymph
node excision; ICG = indocyanine green.
Marking and detection of SLNs
25 mg ICG powder (Verdye, Diagnostic Green GmbH, Aschheim-Dornach, Germany) was dissolved
in 10 ml distilled water to result in a finished solution containing 2.5 mg ICG per
ml. After anesthesia induction and positioning of the patient, 1 ml of the solution
was injected 2–5 times subcutaneously/intradermally into the craniolateral quadrant
of the breast planned for surgery. Unused amounts of the solution were protected against
light, temporarily stored, and used for other ICG-marking procedures performed on
the same day. The surgical site was then disinfected and covered with sterile surgery
drapes. The time between injection and the start of SLNE should be at least 5 minutes
and maximally 60 minutes. The study protocol did not stipulate whether to start with
breast surgery or with SLNE. The access path to the axilla was also not specified,
with access possible either through a separate skin incision performed in the anterior
axillary line or, if this was possible due to
the location of the tumor or the type of breast surgery, from the direction of the
breast. The video-endoscopy systems IMAGE1 S CONNECT, Optik HOPKINS 0° or Rubina 30°
with fluorescence imaging (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) were used to detect the
SLN ([Fig. 2]).
Fig. 2
Intraoperative imaging of two sentinel lymph nodes marked with indocyanine green using
a near-infrared camera.
Recorded complications
Potential injection-related complications (hematoma, skin discoloration, allergic
reaction) were recorded immediately postoperatively by the surgeon using a standardized
protocol. All participants in the study were contacted by telephone four weeks postoperatively
and specifically asked about postoperative complications in the breast or axilla (persistent
skin discoloration, skin necrosis, seroma, wound infection, hematoma). If complications
persisted, the patient was again contacted by telephone four weeks later.
Cost analysis
To compare the cost of SLN marking using 99mTc or ICG, the prices which applied during the investigation period including statutory
value-added tax were used. For the ICG marking, the costs of consumable materials
(injection cannula, syringe and ICG solution) per SLNE were calculated. For the 99mTc marking of the SLN, the costs of the nuclear medicine specialist per SLN marking
and the transportation costs to the nuclear medicine department were analyzed per
patient. In addition, the difference in costs between 99mTc and ICG marking and the cost of upgrading an existing laparoscopy tower to include
the required ICG endoscopy technology (manufacturer information dated 12/2022) was
calculated, including how many SLNEs were needed until the purchase price would be
recouped, based on the option of carrying out up to three SLNEs with ICG marking per
day (i.e., including the cost of purchasing 3 lenses).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was done using SPSS software, version 27 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA).
Descriptive analysis was used to characterize the study cohort and surgical parameters,
with qualitative data summarized as absolute or relative frequencies and quantitative
parameters as mean (± standard deviation) or median (minimum – maximum).
Results
Patient cohort
During the investigation period, axillary SLNE was indicated in 132 of 325 (40.6%)
patients with a first diagnosis of invasive breast cancer or DCIS. No SLNE was carried
out in 193 (59.4%) patients first diagnosed with breast malignancy in the investigation
period for the following reasons: distant metastasis, n = 22; clinically suspicious
axillary lymph node, n = 39; breast-conserving surgery for DCIS, n = 30; postmenopausal
patients with breast-conserving surgery and invasive HR-positive, HER2-negative tumor
with a diameter of < 2 cm, n = 62; ongoing primary systemic therapy, n = 34; other
reasons, n = 6. A total of 33 patients with an indication for SLNE were excluded from
the study (primary systemic therapy, n = 26/19.7%; known intolerance of iodine/sodium
iodide/ICG, n = 4/3.0%; pre-existing thyroid disease, n = 1/0.8%; pregnancy/lactation,
n = 1/0.8%; refused study participation, n = 1/0.8%), which left 99 patients as the
study cohort ([Fig. 1]). In one female patient with bilateral breast cancer, SLNE was carried out on both
sides, meaning that a total of 100 SLNEs were available for evaluation. Three patients
(3.0%) were male; 26 patients (26.3%) were obese ([Table 1]). Lymph node metastases were confirmed in 18 cases (18.0%) ([Table 2]). ALND was carried out in 7 (7.0%) patients (2 × because of non-detection of the
SLN, 5 × because of metastases in the SLN). In five cases (5.0%), the indication for
SLNE was in the context of a mastectomy for DCIS; in 95 cases (95.0%) the indication
was made in the context of invasive breast cancer ([Table 2]). Prior operations of the affected breast were for tumor resection of benign findings
in four (4.0%) cases and breast-conserving surgery for malignancy in
two (2.0%) patients. A separate skin incision in the axilla was used as the access
pathway for SLNE in 85 (85.0%) cases; in 15 cases (15.0%), the axillary fossa was
opened from the side of the breast.
Table 1
Clinical characteristics of the studied patient cohort (n = 99).
Parameter
|
n (%)
|
BMI = body mass index; SD = standard deviation; WHO = World Health Organization
|
Mean age, years (± SD)
|
62.6 (± 12.6)
|
Mean BMI, kg/m2 (± SD)
|
26.8 (± 5.6)
|
Obesity classification of the WHO
|
|
Underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2)
|
2 (2.0)
|
Normal weight (BMI 18.5–24.9 kg/m2)
|
42 (42.4)
|
Overweight (BMI 25.0–29.9 kg/m2)
|
29 (29.3)
|
Obese class I (BMI 30.0–34.9 kg/m2)
|
16 (16.2)
|
Obese class II (BMI 35.0–39.9 kg/m2)
|
6 (6.1)
|
Obese class III (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2)
|
4 (4.0)
|
Sex
|
|
Female
|
96 (97.0)
|
Male
|
3 (3.0)
|
Synchronous bilateral breast cancer
|
|
Yes
|
1 (1.0)
|
No
|
98 (99.0)
|
Menopausal status (medical history)
|
|
Pre-/perimenopausal
|
23 (23.2)
|
Postmenopausal
|
70 (70.8)
|
Not specified
|
3 (3.0)
|
Not applicable (male)
|
3 (3.0)
|
Table 2
Tumor and surgical characteristics of the performed sentinel lymph node excision (n = 100).
Parameter
|
n (%)
|
DCIS = ductal carcinoma in situ; HER2 = human epidermal growth factor receptor 2;
HR = hormone receptor; max = maximum; min = minimum; SD = standard deviation; SLN
= sentinel lymph node; SLNE = sentinel lymph node excision
|
Prior breast surgery
|
|
Yes
|
6 (6.0)
|
No
|
94 (94.0)
|
Oncoplastic breast surgery
|
|
Yes
|
6 (6.0)
|
No
|
91 (91.0)
|
Not applicable (SLNE alone)
|
3 (3.0)
|
Tumor type
|
|
Invasive ductal
|
60 (60.0)
|
Invasive lobular
|
21 (21.0)
|
Mixed invasive ductal/lobular
|
7 (7.0)
|
Other invasive tumor
|
7 (7.0)
|
DCIS
|
5 (5.0)
|
Tumor biology
|
|
HR+/HER2−
|
83 (83.0)
|
HR+/HER2+
|
2 (2.0)
|
HR−/HER2+
|
2 (2.0)
|
HR−/HER2−
|
8 (8.0)
|
Not applicable (DCIS)
|
5 (5.0)
|
Histological grading
|
|
1
|
13 (13.0)
|
2
|
74 (74.0)
|
3
|
8 (8.0)
|
Not applicable (DCIS)
|
5 (5.0)
|
Mean Ki-67, % (± SD)
|
15.1 (± 12.8)
|
Tumor location
|
|
Craniolateral
|
36 (36.0)
|
Craniomedial
|
24 (24.0)
|
Caudolateral
|
9 (9.0)
|
Caudomedial
|
10 (10.0)
|
Central
|
12 (12.0)
|
Multicentric
|
9 (9.0)
|
Breast surgery
|
|
Breast-conserving
|
59 (59.0)
|
Mastectomy
|
38 (38.0)
|
SLNE alone
|
3 (3.0)
|
Median number of SLNs detected intraoperatively (min–max)
|
1 (0–4)
|
Median number of histologically confirmed SLNs (min–max)
|
2 (0–9)
|
SLN histology
|
|
pN0(sn)
|
81 (81.0)
|
pN1mi(sn)
|
2 (2.0)
|
pN1(sn)
|
13 (13.0)
|
pN2(sn)
|
2 (2.0)
|
Not specified
|
2 (2.0)
|
pT stage
|
|
pTis
|
5 (5.0)
|
pT1
|
49 (49.0)
|
pT2
|
44 (44.0)
|
pT3
|
1 (1.0)
|
pT4
|
1 (1.0)
|
pN stage
|
|
pN0
|
82 (82.0)
|
pN1mic
|
2 (2.0)
|
pN1
|
13 (13.0)
|
pN2
|
3 (3.0)
|
pN3
|
0 (0.0)
|
Detection rate of ICG-marked SLNs
After the injection of a mean of 2.9 (± 0.9) ml of ICG solution and a mean time of
22.5 (± 8.7) minutes between the injection and the start of the SLNE, at least 1 SLN
was detected intraoperatively in 98.0% of cases (98 of 100 SLNEs). One of the patients
with an undetected SLN (female, 60 years old, BMI 20.0 kg/m2) had a mixed invasive ductal and invasive lobular, retromammary, HR-positive, HER2-negative
breast carcinoma with a diameter of 36 mm and no axillary lymph node metastases on
ALND (pT2 pN0 cM0 R0, G2). The volume of injected ICG solution was 4 × 1 ml and the
time between injection and SLNE was 20 minutes; the patient underwent mastectomy without
reconstruction. The second patient (female, 61 years old, BMI 25.2 kg/m2) had a craniolateral invasive ductal, triple-negative breast carcinoma with a diameter
of 9 mm and also no lymph node metastases (pT1b pN0 cM0 R0, G2). This patient underwent
breast-conserving surgery during which 3 × 1 ml ICG
was administered, and SLNE was performed 40 minutes after injection through a separate
axillary skin incision.
Complications after ICG marking of the SLN
In 11 (11.0%) cases with ICG marking, the surgeon reported green discoloration of
the skin around the site of injection immediately intraoperatively ([Fig. 3]). No other complications occurred immediately after injection. Postoperatively,
five patients (5.2%) had hematoma, six (6.3%) had a seroma and two (2.1%) had wound
infection in the axilla. A total of 96 of 99 patients (97.0%) were successfully contacted
by telephone four weeks postoperatively. Of these patients, eight (8.3%) reported
persistent skin discoloration at four weeks after injection. When these patients were
contacted again four weeks later, no skin discoloration was visible in any of the
patients.
Fig. 3
Skin discoloration in the right breast on the first postoperative day after breast-conserving
surgery with axillary sentinel lymph node excision (invasive ductal breast cancer
on the right side, pT2 pN0(0/1sn) cM0 R0, G2).
Cost comparison of ICG and 99mTc marking
The mean cost of axillary SLN marking with 99mTc per SLNE at the University Gynecology Hospital of Rostock was 233.09 Euros during
the study period and the mean cost of ICG-based SLN marking was 62.73 Euros. This
results in a difference of 170.36 Euros. If existing laparoscopy towers are upgraded
with ICG technology, the costs incurred by switching from marking with 99mTc to marking with ICG would be recouped after 324 SLNEs.
Discussion
The current prospective study demonstrates the feasibility of axillary SLNE using
only the fluorescent dye ICG for marking. The study showed a high DR for SLN after
marking with ICG. This confirms the results of earlier, prospective, randomized studies
in which the DRs were just as high as those reported after marking with 99mTc [12]
[13] and higher than after marking with blue dye alone [14]. However, those studies did not compare SLN marking using ICG alone with the results
of other tracers; instead, marking with ICG was always done in combination with 99mTc or blue dye and compared with the results for 99mTc or blue dye alone. There are currently no randomized studies which compare the
DR of SLNs in breast cancer patients using
ICG alone with other marking methods. Similarly, in contrast to our study, the non-randomized
cohort studies which reported DRs of more than 95% for SLN after marking with ICG
administered 99mTc in addition to ICG [15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]. Only two studies investigated marking with ICG alone. A retrospective cohort analysis
reported a DR of 94.4% in 36 patients where SLN marking was carried out using ICG
alone [21]. A second prospective cohort study of 184 patients reported
a DR of 98.4% [22]. These results were confirmed in our study but using higher ICG doses, a different
injection technique and a different camera system. In our study, neither of the patients
in whom the SLN was not detected were obese. The reportedly poorer detection of ICG
in obese patients because of a maximum penetration depth of 2 cm [23], especially in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2
[24], was not replicated in our study. Moreover, our study shows that an approach to
reduce scarring by not performing a separate axillary skin incision does not negatively
affect the DR of SLN, even after marking with ICG alone. When dissecting ICG-marked
SLNs, it is important to be aware that cutting lymphatic pathways may result in a
broader diffusion of ICG into the
surrounding tissue, making it more difficult to identify the SLN [25].
Only a few patients are unsuitable for ICG marking due to contraindications. No serious
complications such as allergic reactions occurred in our study. This confirms the
observation that intolerance reactions are very rare (0.002%) [26]. It should be noted, however, that when an intradermal/subcutaneous injection of
ICG is administered at a dosage of 5–12.5 mg and a concentration of 2.5 mg/ml, as
was done in our study, skin discoloration around the injection site occurred in 8.3%
of patients and this persisted for several weeks postoperatively. This has not been
previously described in other studies. The amount of ICG used and the ICG concentration
corresponds to the amount recommended in the literature of ˃ 2 ml and ˂ 5 mg/ml for
an optimal DR [27]. If necessary, drainage of the fluorescent dye from the skin may be expedited by
carrying out local massage immediately after the injection, which could avoid the
unwanted skin discoloration effect. But ultimately, all skin discolorations were only
transient.
The immediate cost of marking is lower when ICG is administered compared to marking
with 99mTc. Detection of axillary SLNs using conventional ICG-compatible laparoscopic technology
is possible. If the technology is already available, the administration of ICG is
cheaper than radionuclide marking. If an existing laparoscopy tower needs to be upgraded
to be capable of detecting ICG, more than 300 SLNEs with ICG marking need to be performed
to recoup the purchase costs. Because of the importance of ICG for marking SLNs in
gynecological malignancies [28]
[29], many gynecology departments already have this laparoscopic technology, which requires
a near-infrared camera system. In addition to the lower costs, ICG marking of SLN
also offers logistical advantages compared to using 99mTc. As the injection is done by the
surgeon immediately preoperatively, the time of surgery can be planned independently
from the nuclear medicine department. Whether this additionally results in cost savings
due to optimization of logistical processes is not a question that this current study
can answer. Direct benefits for patients include no exposure to radiation, no need
to be transported to the nuclear medicine department, and the fact that ICG is only
injected after the induction of anesthesia (avoids pain). One disadvantage of using
ICG to mark SLNs irrespective of the tumor entity is that this constitutes an off-label
use and patients must be explicitly informed about this.
The advantage of this study is its prospective study design which allowed a standardized
investigation into the use of ICG alone according to a previously specified protocol
and any complications to be recorded several weeks postoperatively. The limitations
of this study are its single-center design and that it was not possible to determine
the FNR after ICG marking as treatment was carried out in accordance with current
guidelines and ALND was therefore not carried out in all patients. Whether tattooing
in the area of the ICG injection site leads to changes in the lymphatic drainage pathways
was not part of this investigation. Initial data about the possible impact of lymphatic
drainage were only published after the study planning phase had been completed [30] and this question needs to be investigated in future studies. A direct comparison
between marking with ICG alone and standard marking with
99mTc with regards to the DR, the number of resected SLNs and the duration of surgery
is not possible in the context of this study design. Based on the current analysis,
comparing the use of ICG with the use of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) to mark
SLNs [7], an approach that has been recommended by the AGO, is only indirectly possible.
On the one hand, the SPIO method is not in use in the hospital where the study was
carried out; on the other hand, there are no studies which directly compare the two
methods. A review reported a pooled DR of 97.4% when SPIO was used [31]. This is comparable with the DR for ICG found in our study.
Conclusion
ICG can be used to mark axillary SLNs in cases with breast malignancy and has a high
DR using the technique described here. ICG can be used irrespective of whether the
patient is obese but patients must be informed that using ICG for marking is an off-label
use. Pre-existing contraindications against the use of ICG are rare but must be inquired
into. While patients should be informed about possible transient skin discoloration
in the area around the site of injection, serious systemic complications are rare.
Marking with ICG is less expensive than marking with 99mTc and offers advantages both with regards to logistical processes and with regards
to the lower burden on patients. Especially in view of the fact that 99mTc is sometimes in short supply, the administration of ICG in a standardized setting
represents a cost-efficient alternative for almost all patients for whom axillary
SLNE is indicated and also offers logistical benefits, but in Germany this
still constitutes an off-label use.