BACKGROUND: Selective neck dissection as a part of an elective or therapeutic treatment of the neck is a common practice during the surgical treatment of patients with head and neck cancer. Recently, the need for routine dissection of level IIb has been discussed. The aim of this study was to verify the incidence of metastases at level IIb in patients with clinically negative necks (N0) and clinically positive necks (N+) and discuss the need for its excision. METHODS: A total of 114 patients with head and neck cancer undergoing neck dissection were prospectively analyzed. The total number of neck dissections analyzed was 148. The surgical specimens from each node level of the neck were pathologically diagnosed, with special attention to level IIb. Univariate associations between N classification and IIb positive cases were assessed using logistic regression and between IIa and IIb positive cases using Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Of 148 neck dissections performed, level IIb resulted positive in 5 cases (3.3%): 1 patient with laryngeal cancer, 1 patient with oral cavity cancer, and 2 patients with oropharyngeal cancer, of which 1 underwent bilateral neck dissection. According to clinical N classification, for N0 and N+ the incidence of positive level IIb was 2% and 5%, respectively. All the cases with metastases at level IIb also showed metastases at level IIa. A statistically significant association between the presence of nodal metastases at level IIb and those at level IIa (p <.001) was found. The statistical association between N classification and IIb positive nodes only showed a trend toward significance (p = .06). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of metastases at level IIb is low, also in the N+ necks, therefore dissection of this level could be unnecessary in N0 necks. Furthermore, an interesting statistical association between the presence of metastases at level IIb and at level IIa was recorded. (c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2008.
BACKGROUND: Selective neck dissection as a part of an elective or therapeutic treatment of the neck is a common practice during the surgical treatment of patients with head and neck cancer. Recently, the need for routine dissection of level IIb has been discussed. The aim of this study was to verify the incidence of metastases at level IIb in patients with clinically negative necks (N0) and clinically positive necks (N+) and discuss the need for its excision. METHODS: A total of 114 patients with head and neck cancer undergoing neck dissection were prospectively analyzed. The total number of neck dissections analyzed was 148. The surgical specimens from each node level of the neck were pathologically diagnosed, with special attention to level IIb. Univariate associations between N classification and IIb positive cases were assessed using logistic regression and between IIa and IIb positive cases using Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Of 148 neck dissections performed, level IIb resulted positive in 5 cases (3.3%): 1 patient with laryngeal cancer, 1 patient with oral cavity cancer, and 2 patients with oropharyngeal cancer, of which 1 underwent bilateral neck dissection. According to clinical N classification, for N0 and N+ the incidence of positive level IIb was 2% and 5%, respectively. All the cases with metastases at level IIb also showed metastases at level IIa. A statistically significant association between the presence of nodal metastases at level IIb and those at level IIa (p <.001) was found. The statistical association between N classification and IIb positive nodes only showed a trend toward significance (p = .06). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of metastases at level IIb is low, also in the N+ necks, therefore dissection of this level could be unnecessary in N0 necks. Furthermore, an interesting statistical association between the presence of metastases at level IIb and at level IIa was recorded. (c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2008.
Authors: Soon-Hyun Ahn; Hyun Jun Hong; Soon Young Kwon; Kee Hwan Kwon; Jong-Lyel Roh; Junsun Ryu; Jun Hee Park; Seung-Kuk Baek; Guk Haeng Lee; Sei Young Lee; Jin Choon Lee; Man Ki Chung; Young Hoon Joo; Yong Bae Ji; Jeong Hun Hah; Minsu Kwon; Young Min Park; Chang Myeon Song; Sung-Chan Shin; Chang Hwan Ryu; Doh Young Lee; Young Chan Lee; Jae Won Chang; Ha Min Jeong; Jae-Keun Cho; Wonjae Cha; Byung Joon Chun; Ik Joon Choi; Hyo Geun Choi; Kang Dae Lee Journal: Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 3.372
Authors: Carlos Suárez; Juan P Rodrigo; K Thomas Robbins; Vinidh Paleri; Carl E Silver; Alessandra Rinaldo; Jesus E Medina; Marc Hamoir; Alvaro Sanabria; Vanni Mondin; Robert P Takes; Alfio Ferlito Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Yogen P Chheda; Sundaram K Pillai; Devendra G Parikh; Nandy Dipayan; Shakuntala V Shah; Gupta Alaknanda Journal: Indian J Surg Oncol Date: 2014-11-13
Authors: Andreas Pabst; Daniel G E Thiem; Elisabeth Goetze; Alexander K Bartella; Michael T Neuhaus; Jürgen Hoffmann; Alexander-N Zeller Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Sun Min Park; Dong Jin Lee; Eun Jae Chung; Jin Hwan Kim; Il Seok Park; Min Joo Lee; Young Soo Rho Journal: Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 3.372