BACKGROUND: Inadequate resection margins in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma have an adverse effect on patient outcome. Intraoperative assessment provides immediate feedback enabling the surgeon to achieve adequate resection margins. The goal of this study was to evaluate the value of specimen-driven intraoperative assessment by comparing the margin status in the period before and the period after the introduction of specimen-driven assessment as a standard of care (period 2010-2012 vs period 2013-2017). METHODS: A cohort of patients surgically treated for oral squamous cell carcinoma at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, between 2010-2012 was studied retrospectively and compared to results of a prospectively collected cohort between 2013-2017. The frequency, type and results of intraoperative assessment of resection margins were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients were included from 2010-2012, 241 patients were included from 2013-2017. An increase in the frequency of specimen-driven assessment was seen between the two periods, from 5% in 2010-2012 to 34% in 2013-2017. When performing specimen-driven assessment, 16% tumor-positive resection margins were found in 2013-2017, compared to 43% tumor-positive resection margins overall in 2010-2012. We found a significant reduction of inadequate resection margins for specimen-driven intraoperative assessment (p < 0.001). Also, tumor recurrence significantly decreased, and disease-specific survival improved when performing specimen-driven intraoperative assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Specimen-driven intraoperative assessment improves resection margins and consequently, the outcome of oral cancer patients. We advocate this method as standard of care.
BACKGROUND: Inadequate resection margins in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma have an adverse effect on patient outcome. Intraoperative assessment provides immediate feedback enabling the surgeon to achieve adequate resection margins. The goal of this study was to evaluate the value of specimen-driven intraoperative assessment by comparing the margin status in the period before and the period after the introduction of specimen-driven assessment as a standard of care (period 2010-2012 vs period 2013-2017). METHODS: A cohort of patients surgically treated for oral squamous cell carcinoma at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, between 2010-2012 was studied retrospectively and compared to results of a prospectively collected cohort between 2013-2017. The frequency, type and results of intraoperative assessment of resection margins were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients were included from 2010-2012, 241 patients were included from 2013-2017. An increase in the frequency of specimen-driven assessment was seen between the two periods, from 5% in 2010-2012 to 34% in 2013-2017. When performing specimen-driven assessment, 16% tumor-positive resection margins were found in 2013-2017, compared to 43% tumor-positive resection margins overall in 2010-2012. We found a significant reduction of inadequate resection margins for specimen-driven intraoperative assessment (p < 0.001). Also, tumor recurrence significantly decreased, and disease-specific survival improved when performing specimen-driven intraoperative assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Specimen-driven intraoperative assessment improves resection margins and consequently, the outcome of oral cancer patients. We advocate this method as standard of care.
Authors: Michael L Hinni; Alfio Ferlito; Margaret S Brandwein-Gensler; Robert P Takes; Carl E Silver; William H Westra; Raja R Seethala; Juan P Rodrigo; June Corry; Carol R Bradford; Jennifer L Hunt; Primož Strojan; Kenneth O Devaney; Douglas R Gnepp; Dana M Hartl; Luiz P Kowalski; Alessandra Rinaldo; Leon Barnes Journal: Head Neck Date: 2012-09-03 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: Daniella Karassawa Zanoni; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Bin Xu; Nora Katabi; Pablo H Montero; Ian Ganly; Jatin P Shah; Richard J Wong; Ronald A Ghossein; Snehal G Patel Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Eleanor R McIntosh; Shuko Harada; Joseph Drwiega; Margaret S Brandwein-Gensler; Jennifer Gordetsky Journal: Ann Diagn Pathol Date: 2015-07-11 Impact factor: 2.090
Authors: Sandhya Gokavarapu; L M Chandrasekhara Rao; Munish Mahajan; Nagendra Parvataneni; K V V N Raju; Ravi Chander Journal: Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 1.651
Authors: Eben L Rosenthal; Jason M Warram; Esther de Boer; James P Basilion; Merrill A Biel; Matthew Bogyo; Michael Bouvet; Brian E Brigman; Yolonda L Colson; Steven R DeMeester; Geoffrey C Gurtner; Takeaki Ishizawa; Paula M Jacobs; Stijn Keereweer; Joseph C Liao; Quyen T Nguyen; James M Olson; Keith D Paulsen; Dwaine Rieves; Baran D Sumer; Michael F Tweedle; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Jamey P Weichert; Brian C Wilson; Michael R Zenn; Kurt R Zinn; Gooitzen M van Dam Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Yassine Aaboubout; Quincy M van der Toom; Maria A J de Ridder; Maria J De Herdt; Berdine van der Steen; Cornelia G F van Lanschot; Elisa M Barroso; Maria R Nunes Soares; Ivo Ten Hove; Hetty Mast; Roeland W H Smits; Aniel Sewnaik; Dominiek A Monserez; Stijn Keereweer; Peter J Caspers; Robert J Baatenburg de Jong; Tom C Bakker Schut; Gerwin J Puppels; José A Hardillo; Senada Koljenović Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-03-12 Impact factor: 6.244