The number of lymph nodes cleared is currently considered to be greater than 10. In practice, a significant percentage of patients do not achieve this number, either because the number of lymph nodes is really small, or because all lymph nodes were not removed during pathology, or because the surgeon did not clear all axillary lymph nodes. So it varies a lot from hospital to hospital. There is also a lot of debate about how many lymph nodes should be removed. The clinical significance of the number of axillary lymph nodes is twofold: 1. The number of axillary lymph nodes with relatively few metastases is only a basis for the development of subsequent treatment. As an example: which is more plausible: 0/10 or 1/30? Who can guarantee that there will not be 1 positive lymph node in the remaining 20+ lymph nodes? In postmenopausal T0 breast cancer, if ER+, N0 does not need chemotherapy, N1 needs chemotherapy – this is a matter of principle. Another example: which is less severe, 3/10 or 4/30? Who can guarantee that the remaining 20+ lymph nodes are undoubtedly positive? If it is worse than this one, the decision of radiotherapy or not will be wrong – this is a matter of principle. 2, axillary lymph node metastasis is more, at this time the axillary clearance is not only a means of staging – at this time the axillary tumor removal itself is a means of treatment, the axillary fossa is not cleaned up for others, post-operative recurrence, and then want to remedial surgery can never have the opportunity. Since we have the opportunity to clean up the axilla during the first surgery, we should not leave people with problems afterwards. On the one hand, it is about the principle of patient treatment strategy development, on the other hand, it is just a matter of the doctor’s hand, why some people in chemotherapy, endocrine therapy every day to talk so meticulous, clinical trials those figures every day tossed not tired, how to encounter such a principle on the issue instead of playing sloppy? You should not choose not to be in place after the surgery and then compensate with very expensive various measures. There is no basis for taking more lymph nodes, and in fact there is no definitive evidence for taking fewer lymph nodes. The most widely cited evidence is the NSABP trial which says that when more than ten lymph nodes are cleared the prognosis can be evaluated, it does not say that more would be bad, and a student with a passing score of sixty is certainly not the same as a student with a score of 95. Another trial said that axillary radiotherapy and axillary dissection are equivalent – but currently the axilla is not routinely radiated. There are also studies that suggest that axillary clearance can cause a higher incidence of upper extremity edema, but I have never seen upper extremity edema in all the surgeries I have done, and some specialists have a particularly high incidence, so is it related to the surgical procedure. Since the evidence for taking more or less is not very sufficient, why not give the patient a safer treatment? There is a lot of information now that suggests that clearing the third station and axillary tip has a limited prognostic impact, but just look at how tragic those cases of axillary recurrence are. Of course, an internist can say that the patient died from upper extremity edema and infection, not from breast cancer, and that would not be a tumor-related death. However, as a surgeon I don’t think it’s true that the patient died of upper extremity edema and dengue due to axillary recurrence is not a tumor related death. A show of hands gives the patient more safety, so why not do it. The patient’s life is in the lecturer’s mere data, but it is not a matter of probability for the patient anymore.