口腔癌的肿瘤床边缘与标本边缘:太接近而无法判定?

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Noémie Villemure-Poliquin, Ève-Marie Roy, Sally Nguyen, Michel Beauchemin, Nathalie Audet
{"title":"口腔癌的肿瘤床边缘与标本边缘:太接近而无法判定?","authors":"Noémie Villemure-Poliquin, Ève-Marie Roy, Sally Nguyen, Michel Beauchemin, Nathalie Audet","doi":"10.1177/19160216241278653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The routine assessment of intraoperative margins has long been the standard of care for oral cavity cancers. However, there is a controversy surrounding the best method for sampling surgical margins. The aim of our study is to determine the precision of a new technique for sampling tumor bed margins (TBMs), to evaluate the impact on survival and the rate of free flap reconstructions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study involved 156 patients with primary cancer of the tongue or floor of the mouth who underwent surgery as initial curative treatment. Patients were separated into 2 groups: one using an oriented TBM derived from Mohs' technique, where the margins are taken from the tumor bed and identified with Vicryl sutures on both the specimen and the tumor bed, and the other using a specimen margins (SMs) driven technique, where the margins are taken from the specimen after the initial resection. Clinicopathologic features, including margin status, were compared for both groups and correlated with locoregional control. Precision of per-operative TBM sampling method was obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 156 patients were included in the study, of which 80 were in TBM group and 76 were in SM group. Precision analysis showed that the oriented TBM technique pertained a 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and an 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival analysis revealed nonstatistically significant differences in both local control (86.88% vs 83.50%; <i>P</i> = .81) as well as local-regional control (82.57% vs 72.32%; <i>P</i> = .21). There was a significant difference in the rate of free flap-surgeries between the 2 groups (30% vs 64.5%; <i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our described oriented TBM technique has demonstrated reduced risk of free flap reconstructive surgery, increased precision, and similar prognostic in terms of local control, locoregional control, and disease-free survival when compared to the SM method.</p>","PeriodicalId":16615,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11384533/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call?\",\"authors\":\"Noémie Villemure-Poliquin, Ève-Marie Roy, Sally Nguyen, Michel Beauchemin, Nathalie Audet\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19160216241278653\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The routine assessment of intraoperative margins has long been the standard of care for oral cavity cancers. However, there is a controversy surrounding the best method for sampling surgical margins. The aim of our study is to determine the precision of a new technique for sampling tumor bed margins (TBMs), to evaluate the impact on survival and the rate of free flap reconstructions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study involved 156 patients with primary cancer of the tongue or floor of the mouth who underwent surgery as initial curative treatment. Patients were separated into 2 groups: one using an oriented TBM derived from Mohs' technique, where the margins are taken from the tumor bed and identified with Vicryl sutures on both the specimen and the tumor bed, and the other using a specimen margins (SMs) driven technique, where the margins are taken from the specimen after the initial resection. Clinicopathologic features, including margin status, were compared for both groups and correlated with locoregional control. Precision of per-operative TBM sampling method was obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 156 patients were included in the study, of which 80 were in TBM group and 76 were in SM group. Precision analysis showed that the oriented TBM technique pertained a 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and an 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival analysis revealed nonstatistically significant differences in both local control (86.88% vs 83.50%; <i>P</i> = .81) as well as local-regional control (82.57% vs 72.32%; <i>P</i> = .21). There was a significant difference in the rate of free flap-surgeries between the 2 groups (30% vs 64.5%; <i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our described oriented TBM technique has demonstrated reduced risk of free flap reconstructive surgery, increased precision, and similar prognostic in terms of local control, locoregional control, and disease-free survival when compared to the SM method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11384533/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241278653\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241278653","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

介绍:对术中边缘进行常规评估一直是口腔癌治疗的标准。然而,围绕手术边缘取样的最佳方法还存在争议。我们的研究旨在确定肿瘤床边缘(TBM)取样新技术的精确度,评估其对生存率和游离皮瓣重建率的影响:这项回顾性队列研究涉及 156 名接受手术作为初始根治性治疗的原发性舌癌或口腔底癌患者。患者被分为两组:一组采用源自莫氏技术的定向 TBM,即从肿瘤床提取边缘,并用 Vicryl 线缝合标本和肿瘤床;另一组采用标本边缘(SMs)驱动技术,即在初次切除后从标本中提取边缘。对两组患者的临床病理特征(包括边缘状态)进行了比较,并将其与局部控制率进行了关联分析。结果:研究共纳入 156 例患者,其中 TBM 组 80 例,SM 组 76 例。精确度分析显示,定向 TBM 技术的敏感性为 50%,特异性为 96.6%,阳性预测值为 80%,阴性预测值为 87.5%。生存期分析显示,局部控制率(86.88% vs 83.50%;P = .81)和局部区域控制率(82.57% vs 72.32%;P = .21)差异无统计学意义。两组间的游离皮瓣手术率存在明显差异(30% vs 64.5%;P 结论:与 SM 方法相比,我们所描述的定向 TBM 技术降低了游离皮瓣重建手术的风险,提高了精确度,并且在局部控制、局部区域控制和无病生存方面具有相似的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call?

Introduction: The routine assessment of intraoperative margins has long been the standard of care for oral cavity cancers. However, there is a controversy surrounding the best method for sampling surgical margins. The aim of our study is to determine the precision of a new technique for sampling tumor bed margins (TBMs), to evaluate the impact on survival and the rate of free flap reconstructions.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study involved 156 patients with primary cancer of the tongue or floor of the mouth who underwent surgery as initial curative treatment. Patients were separated into 2 groups: one using an oriented TBM derived from Mohs' technique, where the margins are taken from the tumor bed and identified with Vicryl sutures on both the specimen and the tumor bed, and the other using a specimen margins (SMs) driven technique, where the margins are taken from the specimen after the initial resection. Clinicopathologic features, including margin status, were compared for both groups and correlated with locoregional control. Precision of per-operative TBM sampling method was obtained.

Results: A total of 156 patients were included in the study, of which 80 were in TBM group and 76 were in SM group. Precision analysis showed that the oriented TBM technique pertained a 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and an 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival analysis revealed nonstatistically significant differences in both local control (86.88% vs 83.50%; P = .81) as well as local-regional control (82.57% vs 72.32%; P = .21). There was a significant difference in the rate of free flap-surgeries between the 2 groups (30% vs 64.5%; P < .001).

Conclusion: Our described oriented TBM technique has demonstrated reduced risk of free flap reconstructive surgery, increased precision, and similar prognostic in terms of local control, locoregional control, and disease-free survival when compared to the SM method.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing on all aspects and sub-specialties of otolaryngology-head & neck surgery, including pediatric and geriatric otolaryngology, rhinology & anterior skull base surgery, otology/neurotology, facial plastic & reconstructive surgery, head & neck oncology, and maxillofacial rehabilitation, as well as a broad range of related topics.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信