↓ Skip to main content

Impact of immunohistochemistry in sentinel lymph node biopsy in head and neck cancer

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Impact of immunohistochemistry in sentinel lymph node biopsy in head and neck cancer
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00405-012-2032-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos Takahiro Chone, Marcello B. Aniteli, Rodrigo S. Magalhães, Leandro L. Freitas, Albina Altemani, Celso D. Ramos, Elba Etchebehere, Agricio N. Crespo

Abstract

To determine the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining compared to immunohistochemistry (IHC) in sentinel lymph node (SLN) histological analyses of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The Clinical prospective study was carried out at Tertiary referral university hospital. Patients with oral, lip and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma undergoing elective neck dissection with clinically and radiologically negative necks were included. All patients were submitted to computer tomography scan for the evaluation of lymphatic metastases. The surgical procedure consisted of tumor resection, SLN sampling and elective neck dissection. Negative SLNs via HE were then submitted for IHC analysis of cytokeratin AE1/AE3 and step serial section (SSS). The main outcome measures were the negative predictive value of conventional HE staining techniques in the diagnosis of lymphatic metastases with the SSS/IHC analysis. Of 46 patients undergoing 63 neck procedures, 53 were SLN negative and 10 were positive on HE analysis. Using SSS/IHC analysis of these 53 negative SLNs on HE, two (3.8 %) were found to be positive. For HE, the sensitivity, specificity, NPV and accuracy were 77, 100, 94, and 95 %, respectively. With subsequent analysis with SSS/IHC, these values increased to 92, 100, 98 and 98 %, respectively. SSS/IHC is important in SLN analysis as the false negative rate decreased significantly while increasing the inherent sensitivity of the analyses.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Student > Master 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 75%
Unspecified 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2012.
All research outputs
#2,741,732
of 3,630,432 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#577
of 795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,697
of 73,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#17
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,630,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 795 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 73,888 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.