Resources
Clinical data
185,000+
total patients treated
98.2%
sentinel lymph node detection rate
96.4%
nodal malignancy detection per patient
95.5%
nodal detection rate
2.3
average nodes obtained per patient
This study shows the use of Magtrace for sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer patients after primary systemic therapy (PST).
Pantiora et al (2024)
This study found SPIO-guided sentinel lymph node detection in early breast cancer to be non-inferior to standard techniques and can safely replace current gold standard methods.
Man et al (2023)
The study found that using Magtrace for delayed sentinel lymph node dissection (dSLNB) in patients with DCIS significantly reduces unnecessary upfront SLNDs, improves nodal detection rates, and lowers healthcare costs.
Karakatsanis et al (2023)
This study shows the cost coverage of surgical procedures for breast cancer treatment in Germany, using superparamagnetic marking.
Lux et al (2023)
This Study shows Magseed and Magtrace used together for breast cancer localization and sentinel lymph node detection.
Pantiora et al (2023)
The study compared skin staining incidence and size after sentinel lymph node biopsy using blue dye and Magtrace. No significant difference was found between tracers.
Jazrawi et al (2022)
The study evaluates the use of Magtrace for sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer, demonstrating comparable effectiveness to traditional radioisotope and blue dye methods, with improved preoperative injection outcomes.
Pantiora et al (2022)
Meta-analysis which shows how the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is superior to blue dye alone and comparable to dual tracer.
Mok et al (2019)
This US based multi-centre prospective study finds the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is non-inferior to the standard technique for SLNB
Alvarado et al (2019)
A safety study showing the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer to be safe with a low risk of complications
Lorek et al (2019)
The largest cohort of the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer-only application for SLNB, providing simpler logistics and operative planning with excellent clinical results
Man et al (2019)
A study showing the combined use of the Magseed® marker and Magtrace® lymphatic tracer for lesion localisation and SLNB
Pohlodek et al (2019)
This study shows that the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer spared DCIS patients the need for unnecessary SLNB by enabling a delayed SLNB technique
Karakatsanis et al (2019)
A study demonstrating accurate lesion localisation and SLN detection with the combined use of the Magseed® marker and Magtrace® lymphatic tracer
Hersi et al (2018)
A study showing that Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is non-inferior to Tc99 and offers both cost and availability benefits to radioisotope
Ghilli et al (2017)
The MONOS study evaluates the use of the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer as the sole tracer used in SLNB
Karakatsanis et al (2017)
Meta-analysis demonstrating how Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is non-inferior to standard Tc99, with or without Blue dye
Teshome et al (2016)
Meta-analysis showing Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is non-inferior to Tc99 and blue dye
Zada et al (2016)
This study shows that the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is a valuable alternative to radioisotope and blue dye
Piñero-Madrona et al (2015)
This study shows that the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is a safe and effective alternative to the standard technique
Karakatsanis eta al (2016)
A study showing that Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is non-inferior to radiotracer and is oncologically safe
Rubio et al (2015)
A study showing Magnetic SLNB can be performed easily, safely and equivalently well in comparison to radioisotope alone
Thill et all (2014)
A feasibility study showing the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer as a contrast agent in MRI to provide pre-op imaging localisation of sentinel lymph nodes
Pouw et al (2015)
A study showing the feasibility of the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer for lesion localisation combined with periareolar injection of blue dye for SLNB
Ahmed et al (2015)
This study shows that the Magtrace® lymphatic tracer is a feasible technique for SLNB with detection rates non-inferior to standard technique
Douek et al (2013)
