Evidence Hub

A clinical feasibility study of a photoacoustic finder for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients: A prospective cross-sectional study

Moongyu Han, Y. Lee, Junho Ahn, Sunghun Nam, Minseong Kim, Jeongwoo Park, Joongho Ahn, Hanyoung Ryu et al.

Photoacoustics, 2025

121 participants · 20 citations

Abstract

The sentinel lymph node (SLNb) is generally performed using radioisotopes, blue dyes, or both to improve false negative rate. However, ionizing radiation is involved in a gamma probe with radioisotopes and the blue dye detection relies on native visual inspection by an operator. To overcome these limitations, we developed the photoacoustic finder (PAF), a highly sensitive, non-radioactive detector that uses only blue dye and a photoacoustic signal to detect SLNs. A total of 121 patients with breast cancer were enrolled, and 375 lymph nodes were excised using conventional SLNb. The PAF was used to measure the signal from the excised lymph nodes. We compared the SLN detection rates of each method (gamma probe, visual inspection, and PAF) and conducted a non-inferiority test. The PAF detected 87 % of SLNs, comparable to the gamma probe (85 %) and superior to visual inspection (73 %). Non-inferiority tests confirmed PAF's performance was not inferior to visual inspection (p < 0.001) or the gamma probe (p < 0.015). Using the dual-modal method (gamma probe + visual inspection) as the gold standard, PAF showed a sensitivity of 0.81 and specificity of 0.63. This study demonstrates that PAF, using only blue dye, offers a non-inferior alternative to the standard dual-modal SLN detection method with radioactive materials, opening new avenues for radiation-free SLNb in the future.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 121 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free