Head & neck · 2025
The Impact of Stratified Surgical Margins on Survival Outcomes in Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter Analysis.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu Timothy, Clark Jonathan, David Michael, Schache Andrew, Bajwa Mandeep S, Low Tsu-Hui, Gupta Ruta, Batstone Martin D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This multicenter study examines the impact of stratified surgical margins on treatment outcomes in oral SCC.
METHODS: Margins were stratified into 1 mm increments from 0 to ≥ 5 mm. Outcomes included local recurrence, overall and disease-specific survivals. Sub-analyses assessed the impact of margin status by risk factors, oral subsites, and peripheral versus deep margins.
RESULTS: Among 2737 patients, ≥ 2 to < 3 mm margins were associated with improved outcomes compared to 0 mm. Further benefits were observed in the ≥ 4 to < 5 mm group. The differences between these two groups were not statistically significant. Improved outcomes were observed with ≥ 2 mm deep margins, but not for peripheral margins. High-risk tumors had better overall and disease-specific survivals with ≥ 2 mm margins. Subsites of the tongue, palate, mandible, and floor of the mouth had improved local control with ≥ 2 mm margins.
CONCLUSION: Margins beyond 4 mm do not confer additional oncological benefit, while achieving ≥ 2 mm, especially in deep margins or high-risk tumors, is critical for optimal outcomes.
METHODS: Margins were stratified into 1 mm increments from 0 to ≥ 5 mm. Outcomes included local recurrence, overall and disease-specific survivals. Sub-analyses assessed the impact of margin status by risk factors, oral subsites, and peripheral versus deep margins.
RESULTS: Among 2737 patients, ≥ 2 to < 3 mm margins were associated with improved outcomes compared to 0 mm. Further benefits were observed in the ≥ 4 to < 5 mm group. The differences between these two groups were not statistically significant. Improved outcomes were observed with ≥ 2 mm deep margins, but not for peripheral margins. High-risk tumors had better overall and disease-specific survivals with ≥ 2 mm margins. Subsites of the tongue, palate, mandible, and floor of the mouth had improved local control with ≥ 2 mm margins.
CONCLUSION: Margins beyond 4 mm do not confer additional oncological benefit, while achieving ≥ 2 mm, especially in deep margins or high-risk tumors, is critical for optimal outcomes.