Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary?

James Fowler, Yael Campanile, Andrew Warner, Francisco Laxague, Naif Fnais, Kevin Fung, Adrian Mendez, Danielle MacNeil, John Yoo, David Palma, Anthony Nichols
{"title":"Surgical margins of the oral cavity: is 5 mm really necessary?","authors":"James Fowler,&nbsp;Yael Campanile,&nbsp;Andrew Warner,&nbsp;Francisco Laxague,&nbsp;Naif Fnais,&nbsp;Kevin Fung,&nbsp;Adrian Mendez,&nbsp;Danielle MacNeil,&nbsp;John Yoo,&nbsp;David Palma,&nbsp;Anthony Nichols","doi":"10.1186/s40463-022-00584-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":520683,"journal":{"name":"Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale","volume":" ","pages":"38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9531519/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-022-00584-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

口腔手术缘:5毫米真的有必要吗?
背景:口腔鳞状细胞癌是口腔最常见的恶性肿瘤。主要治疗包括手术切除肿瘤及周围边缘。历史上,最普遍接受的边际间隙是5毫米。这个距离是有争议的,最近的出版物表明更近的边缘不影响局部复发和生存。本研究的目的是确定不影响局部复发和总体生存的最接近的手术切缘。方法:回顾性分析2010年至2018年伦敦健康科学中心头颈多学科诊所的资料。分析了人口统计学数据、亚位点、肿瘤分期、治疗方式、边缘和生存结果。主要终点是局部无复发生存期。次要终点包括无复发生存期和总生存期。对所有患者进行描述性统计以及单变量和多变量Cox比例风险回归模型。结果:研究纳入了112例患者,中位随访时间为3.3年。单变量分析上,正边际和正边际相差5毫米。手术切缘> 1mm的患者与手术切缘> 5mm的患者预后相似。多变量分析确定诊断年龄、饮酒、病理肿瘤和淋巴结类型是局部无复发生存的预测因素。结论:尽管头颈部手术的历史切缘为5毫米,但在我们的队列中,切缘大于1毫米的患者也观察到类似的结果。这些发现需要通过多机构合作来验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信