4.7 Article

Cost comparison of axillary sentinel lymph node detection and axillary lymphadenectomy in early breast cancer. A national study based on a prospective multi-institutional series of 985 patients 'on behalf of the Group of Surgeons from the French Unicancer Federation'

Journal

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages 1170-1177

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr355

Keywords

axillary lymphadenectomy; breast cancer; cost; sentinel lymph node

Categories

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our objective was to assess the global cost of the sentinel lymph node detection [axillary sentinel lymph node detection (ASLND)] compared with standard axillary lymphadenectomy [axillary lymph node dissection (ALND)] for early breast cancer patients. We conducted a prospective, multi-institutional, observational, cost comparative analysis. Cost calculations were realized with the micro-costing method from the diagnosis until 1 month after the last surgery. Eight hundred and thirty nine patients were included in the ASLND group and 146 in the ALND group. The cost generated for a patient with an ASLND, with one preoperative scintigraphy, a combined method for sentinel node detection, an intraoperative pathological analysis without lymphadenectomy, was lower than the cost generated for a patient with lymphadenectomy [euro2947 (Sigma = 580) versus euro3331 (Sigma = 902); P = 0.0001]. ASLND, involving expensive techniques, was finally less expensive than ALND. The length of hospital stay was the cost driver of these procedures. The current observational study points the heterogeneous practices for this validated and largely diffused technique. Several technical choices have an impact on the cost of ASLND, as intraoperative analysis allowing to reduce rehospitalization rate for secondary lymphadenectomy or preoperative scintigraphy, suggesting possible savings on hospital resources.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available