Cargando…
Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary?
BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy of the oral cavity. Primary treatment involves surgical resection of the tumour with a surrounding margin. Historically, the most commonly accepted margin clearance is 5 mm. This distance is controversial, with recent publications sug...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9531519/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36195903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40463-022-00584-8 |
_version_ | 1784801919368167424 |
---|---|
author | Fowler, James Campanile, Yael Warner, Andrew Laxague, Francisco Fnais, Naif Fung, Kevin Mendez, Adrian MacNeil, Danielle Yoo, John Palma, David Nichols, Anthony |
author_facet | Fowler, James Campanile, Yael Warner, Andrew Laxague, Francisco Fnais, Naif Fung, Kevin Mendez, Adrian MacNeil, Danielle Yoo, John Palma, David Nichols, Anthony |
author_sort | Fowler, James |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy of the oral cavity. Primary treatment involves surgical resection of the tumour with a surrounding margin. Historically, the most commonly accepted margin clearance is 5 mm. This distance is controversial, with recent publications suggesting closer margins do not impact local recurrence and survival. The objective of this study is to determine the closest surgical margin that does not impact local recurrence and overall survival. METHODS: A retrospective review of the London Health Sciences Centre Head and Neck Multidisciplinary Clinic between 2010 and 2018 was performed. Demographic data, subsite, tumour staging, treatment modality, margins, and survival outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was local recurrence free survival. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival and overall survival. Descriptive statistics, as well as univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modelling were performed for all patients. RESULTS: Four-hundred and twelve patients were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 3.3 years. On univariable analysis, positive margins and margins < 1 mm were associated with significantly worse local recurrence-free survival, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival (p < 0.05), compared to margins > 5 mm. Patients with surgical margins > 1 mm experienced similar outcomes to those with margins > 5 mm. Multivariable analysis identified age of diagnosis, alcohol consumption, pathological tumour and nodal category as predictors of local recurrence free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Although historical margins for head and neck surgery are 5 mm, similar outcomes were observed for margins greater than 1 mm in our cohort. These findings require validation through multi-institutional collaborative efforts. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9531519 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95315192022-10-05 Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? Fowler, James Campanile, Yael Warner, Andrew Laxague, Francisco Fnais, Naif Fung, Kevin Mendez, Adrian MacNeil, Danielle Yoo, John Palma, David Nichols, Anthony J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy of the oral cavity. Primary treatment involves surgical resection of the tumour with a surrounding margin. Historically, the most commonly accepted margin clearance is 5 mm. This distance is controversial, with recent publications suggesting closer margins do not impact local recurrence and survival. The objective of this study is to determine the closest surgical margin that does not impact local recurrence and overall survival. METHODS: A retrospective review of the London Health Sciences Centre Head and Neck Multidisciplinary Clinic between 2010 and 2018 was performed. Demographic data, subsite, tumour staging, treatment modality, margins, and survival outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was local recurrence free survival. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival and overall survival. Descriptive statistics, as well as univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modelling were performed for all patients. RESULTS: Four-hundred and twelve patients were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 3.3 years. On univariable analysis, positive margins and margins < 1 mm were associated with significantly worse local recurrence-free survival, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival (p < 0.05), compared to margins > 5 mm. Patients with surgical margins > 1 mm experienced similar outcomes to those with margins > 5 mm. Multivariable analysis identified age of diagnosis, alcohol consumption, pathological tumour and nodal category as predictors of local recurrence free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Although historical margins for head and neck surgery are 5 mm, similar outcomes were observed for margins greater than 1 mm in our cohort. These findings require validation through multi-institutional collaborative efforts. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] BioMed Central 2022-10-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9531519/ /pubmed/36195903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40463-022-00584-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Fowler, James Campanile, Yael Warner, Andrew Laxague, Francisco Fnais, Naif Fung, Kevin Mendez, Adrian MacNeil, Danielle Yoo, John Palma, David Nichols, Anthony Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title | Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title_full | Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title_fullStr | Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title_full_unstemmed | Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title_short | Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
title_sort | surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary? |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9531519/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36195903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40463-022-00584-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fowlerjames surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT campanileyael surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT warnerandrew surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT laxaguefrancisco surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT fnaisnaif surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT fungkevin surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT mendezadrian surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT macneildanielle surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT yoojohn surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT palmadavid surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary AT nicholsanthony surgicalmarginsoftheoralcavityis5mmreallynecessary |