| Literature DB >> 12871595 |
CS Nithya1, Manoj Pandey, BR Naik, Iqbal M Ahamed.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer of the oral tongue is the second most common cancer among males in various parts of India. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment the failure rates in cancer of the oral tongue are high and survival poor. Majority of these failures occur in untreated neck.Entities:
Year: 2003 PMID: 12871595 PMCID: PMC166158 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7819-1-10
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg Oncol ISSN: 1477-7819 Impact factor: 2.754
Surgical management of neck by pathological node status.
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.3 | |
| 15 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 29.3 | |
| 21 | 7 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 38 | 50.6 | |
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 8 | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.3 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | |
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2.6 | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.3 |
SOHND – Supra omohyoid neck dissection; MND – Modified neck dissection; RND – Radical neck dissection; B/L – Bilateral; I/L – Ipsilateral; C/L-Contralateral. * patient had a cardiac arrest during surgery and the procedure was abandoned, this patient went on to develop neck node recurrence and was successfully salvaged by second surgery.
Frequency distribution of various parameters studied.
| Male | 45 | 60 |
| Female | 30 | 40 |
| T1 | 13 | 17.3 |
| T2 | 33 | 44 |
| T3 | 15 | 20 |
| T4 | 14 | 18.7 |
| cN0 | 41 | 54.7 |
| cN1 | 26 | 34.7 |
| cN2b | 6 | 8 |
| cN2c | 2 | 2.7 |
| pN0 | 42 | 56 |
| pN1 | 12 | 16 |
| pN2a | 3 | 4 |
| pN2b | 16 | 21.3 |
| pN2c | 1 | 1.3 |
| pN3 | 1 | 1.3 |
| I | 6 | 18.2 |
| II | 12 | 36.4 |
| III | 2 | 6.1 |
| I, II | 7 | 21.2 |
| I, III | 1 | 1.3 |
| I, IV | 1 | 1.3 |
| II, III | 0 | 0 |
| II, IV | 1 | 1.3 |
| III, IV | 2 | 6.1 |
| I, II, III, IV | 1 | 1.3 |
cN – clinical node status, pN – pathological node status.
Nodal metastasis by tumour stage.
| T1 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 47.05 |
| T2 | 22 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 24.13 |
| T3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 63.6 |
| T4 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 61.1 |
Sensitivity and Specificity of clinical examination in predicting nodal metastasis from cancer of the oral tongue.
| Pathological | |||
| +ve | -ve | ||
| Clinical | -ve | 15 | 26 |
| +ve | 18 | 16 | |
| Sensitivity : | 54.5% | ||
| Specificity : | 61.9% | ||
Disease free survival (DFS) among patients with cancer of the oral tongue by various parameters
| Overall DFS | 75 | 78.4% | 68.42% | |
| T1 | 13 | 85.71% | 76.2% | |
| T2 | 33 | 88.7% | 83.5% | |
| T3 | 15 | 51.4% | 51.4% | |
| T4 | 14 | 68.6% | 36.6% | P = .03 |
| pN0 | 42 | 87% | 79% | |
| pN1 | 12 | 72.7% | 72.7% | |
| pN2 | 20 | 61.4% | 39.5% | |
| pN3 | 1 | - | - | P = .03 |
Figure 1Overall disease free survival for carcinoma oral tongue
Figure 2Disease free survival by tumour stage for patients with cancer of the oral tongue.
Figure 3Disease free survival by nodal status for patients with cancer of the oral tongue.