Michael M Li1, Sidharth V Puram1, Dustin A Silverman1, Matthew O Old1, James W Rocco1, Stephen Y Kang2. 1. Division of Head and Neck Oncology, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, The James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 2. Division of Head and Neck Oncology, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, The James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. Stephen.kang@osumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The status of surgical margins is the most important prognosticator for patients undergoing surgical resection of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Despite this, analysis of surgical margins is fraught with inconsistencies, including the ways in which margins are sampled and interpreted. Fundamentally, even the definition what constitutes a "clear" (or negative) margin may vary between institutions, surgeons, and pathologists. METHODS: The PubMed database was queried for articles relevant to the topic, and experts in the field were consulted regarding key articles for inclusion. Abstracts were reviewed and the full text was accessed for articles of particular interest. RESULTS: Data regarding various approaches to traditional margin analysis have been published without consensus. Several next-generation technologies have emerged in recent years that hold promise. CONCLUSION: An overview and appraisal of traditional margin analysis techniques are provided. Additionally, we explore novel technologies that may assist in more accurate margin assessment, guide the extent of surgical resections intraoperatively, and inform decisions regarding adjuvant treatment postoperatively.
BACKGROUND: The status of surgical margins is the most important prognosticator for patients undergoing surgical resection of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Despite this, analysis of surgical margins is fraught with inconsistencies, including the ways in which margins are sampled and interpreted. Fundamentally, even the definition what constitutes a "clear" (or negative) margin may vary between institutions, surgeons, and pathologists. METHODS: The PubMed database was queried for articles relevant to the topic, and experts in the field were consulted regarding key articles for inclusion. Abstracts were reviewed and the full text was accessed for articles of particular interest. RESULTS: Data regarding various approaches to traditional margin analysis have been published without consensus. Several next-generation technologies have emerged in recent years that hold promise. CONCLUSION: An overview and appraisal of traditional margin analysis techniques are provided. Additionally, we explore novel technologies that may assist in more accurate margin assessment, guide the extent of surgical resections intraoperatively, and inform decisions regarding adjuvant treatment postoperatively.
Authors: Stijn Keereweer; Jeroen D F Kerrebijn; Isabel M Mol; J Sven D Mieog; Pieter B A A Van Driel; Robert J Baatenburg de Jong; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Clemens W G M Löwik Journal: Head Neck Date: 2011-10-10 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Eugenie Du; Thomas J Ow; Yung-Tai Lo; Adam Gersten; Bradley A Schiff; Andrew B Tassler; Richard V Smith Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2016-04-26 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Jeremie Berdugo; Lester D R Thompson; Bibianna Purgina; Charles D Sturgis; Madalina Tuluc; Raja Seethala; Simion I Chiosea Journal: Head Neck Pathol Date: 2018-04-26
Authors: Viola M M van Houten; C René Leemans; J Alain Kummer; Janny Dijkstra; Dirk J Kuik; Michiel W M van den Brekel; Gordon B Snow; Ruud H Brakenhoff Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-06-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J A Brennan; L Mao; R H Hruban; J O Boyle; Y J Eby; W M Koch; S N Goodman; D Sidransky Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-02-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Alice C Yu; David D Afework; Jeffrey D Goldstein; Elliot Abemayor; Abie H Mendelsohn Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 8.961
Authors: Mamata S Kamat; Rudrayya S Puranik; A Bhagavan Das Rai; B R Patil; Shankargouda Patil Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 3.606
Authors: Robert M Brody; David Shimunov; Roger B Cohen; Alexander Lin; John N Lukens; Lee Hartner; Charu Aggarwal; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Kathleen T Montone; Jalal B Jalaly; Virginia A LiVolsi; Ryan M Carey; Rabie M Shanti; Karthik Rajasekaran; Ara A Chalian; Christopher H Rassekh; Steven B Cannady; Jason G Newman; Bert W O'Malley; Gregory S Weinstein; Phyllis A Gimotty; Devraj Basu Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 5.972
Authors: Mustafa G Bulbul; Osama Tarabichi; Anuraag S Parikh; Byung C Yoon; Amy Juliano; Peter M Sadow; William Faquin; Matthew Gropler; Ronald Walker; Sidharth V Puram; Mark A Varvares Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 5.972