Cargando…
Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the four commonly used incisions for Radical Neck Dissection on the basis of certain defined parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The investigators designed and implemented a prospective comparative study composed of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. The predictor varia...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6897041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30803224 http://dx.doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.2.575 |
_version_ | 1783476903502413824 |
---|---|
author | Roy, Satadru Shetty, Vikram Sherigar, Vishwanath Hegde, Padmaraj Prasad, Rajendra |
author_facet | Roy, Satadru Shetty, Vikram Sherigar, Vishwanath Hegde, Padmaraj Prasad, Rajendra |
author_sort | Roy, Satadru |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the four commonly used incisions for Radical Neck Dissection on the basis of certain defined parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The investigators designed and implemented a prospective comparative study composed of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. The predictor variable was time taken to raise and close the flaps, accessibility to the neck lymph nodes, injury to vital structures and scar cosmesis followed up to a period of three months. Descriptive statistics were computed. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 40 patients grouped as follows: Macfee Incision (=10 patients), Modified Macfee Incision (=10 patients), Modified Schobinger Incision (=10 patients) and Reverse Hockey Stick Incision (=10 patients). Group A, consisiting of the patients with Macfee Incision, took the least time to close among all the groups ( Mean= 32.60 minutes) while Group C (patients with Modified Schobinger Incision) required the most time for closure ( Mean= 51.90 minutes). The Modified Schobinger Incision provided best exposure to neck node levels. The Macfee Incision was found to have the best scar cosmesis among the four incisions. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that Modified Schobinger Incision is the preferred incision for adequate access to neck lymphatics while Macfee Incision was found to provide the best scar cosmesis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6897041 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68970412019-12-12 Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study Roy, Satadru Shetty, Vikram Sherigar, Vishwanath Hegde, Padmaraj Prasad, Rajendra Asian Pac J Cancer Prev Research Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the four commonly used incisions for Radical Neck Dissection on the basis of certain defined parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The investigators designed and implemented a prospective comparative study composed of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. The predictor variable was time taken to raise and close the flaps, accessibility to the neck lymph nodes, injury to vital structures and scar cosmesis followed up to a period of three months. Descriptive statistics were computed. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 40 patients grouped as follows: Macfee Incision (=10 patients), Modified Macfee Incision (=10 patients), Modified Schobinger Incision (=10 patients) and Reverse Hockey Stick Incision (=10 patients). Group A, consisiting of the patients with Macfee Incision, took the least time to close among all the groups ( Mean= 32.60 minutes) while Group C (patients with Modified Schobinger Incision) required the most time for closure ( Mean= 51.90 minutes). The Modified Schobinger Incision provided best exposure to neck node levels. The Macfee Incision was found to have the best scar cosmesis among the four incisions. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that Modified Schobinger Incision is the preferred incision for adequate access to neck lymphatics while Macfee Incision was found to provide the best scar cosmesis. West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6897041/ /pubmed/30803224 http://dx.doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.2.575 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Roy, Satadru Shetty, Vikram Sherigar, Vishwanath Hegde, Padmaraj Prasad, Rajendra Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title | Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title_full | Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title_short | Evaluation of Four Incisions Used For Radical Neck Dissection- A Comparative Study |
title_sort | evaluation of four incisions used for radical neck dissection- a comparative study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6897041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30803224 http://dx.doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.2.575 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT roysatadru evaluationoffourincisionsusedforradicalneckdissectionacomparativestudy AT shettyvikram evaluationoffourincisionsusedforradicalneckdissectionacomparativestudy AT sherigarvishwanath evaluationoffourincisionsusedforradicalneckdissectionacomparativestudy AT hegdepadmaraj evaluationoffourincisionsusedforradicalneckdissectionacomparativestudy AT prasadrajendra evaluationoffourincisionsusedforradicalneckdissectionacomparativestudy |