BACKGROUND: Use of blue dye alone as a marker for @entity1600 ( @entity1600 ) biopsy is effective, but combining it with isotope marking can improve the success rate. Use of the isotope adds extra cost and there are potential radiation hazards. The two techniques were compared in a randomized trial. METHODS: @entity1 with early @entity0 (less than 3 cm) and no palpable axillary nodes were recruited. @entity1 older than 70 years with @entity5 or previous surgery to the breast or axilla were excluded. @entity1 were randomized to either blue dye alone or combined mapping for @entity1600 biopsy. All @entity1 had a level I and II axillary dissection after the @entity1600 biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 123 @entity1 were recruited, of whom five were excluded from analysis. Blue dye alone was used in 57 @entity1 and 61 had combined mapping. Baseline demographic data were similar in the two cohorts. The success rate of @entity1600 biopsy was higher with combined mapping than with blue dye alone (100 versus 86 per cent; P = 0.002). The accuracy and false-negative rate were similar (accuracy 100 per cent for combined mapping versus 98 per cent for blue dye; false-negative rate 0 versus 5 per cent). CONCLUSION: Combined mapping was superior to blue dye alone in identification of the @entity1600 , but accuracy and false-negative rates were similar.

Randomized clinical trial comparing blue dye with combined dye and isotope for XXXX biopsy in @entity0 .

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['women', 'Patients', 'patients', 'Women'] @entity5 :: ('MESH:D009369', 'Disease') :: ['multicentric cancers'] @entity1600 :: ('MESH:D014388', 'Disease') :: ['sentinel lymph node', 'SLN'] @entity0 :: ('MESH:D001943', 'Disease') :: ['breast cancer']
@entity1600 :: (MESH:D014388,Disease) :: ['sentinel lymph node']
