Comparative analysis of resection boundaries depending on the defect elimination method in oral mucosal cancer

Author:

Musin Sh. I.1ORCID,Menshikov K. V.1ORCID,Sultanbayev A. V.2ORCID,Sharifgaleev I. A.2ORCID,Ilyin V. V.2ORCID,Guz A. O.3ORCID,Rudyk A. N.4ORCID,Osokin S. V.2ORCID,Sharafutdinova N. A.2ORCID,Chashchin A. V.2ORCID,Garev A. V.3ORCID,Baymuratov T. R.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Ministry of Health of the Republic of Bashkortostan; Bashkir State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia

2. Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Ministry of Health of the Republic of Bashkortostan

3. Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Center of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine

4. Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary named after Prof. M. Z. Sigal, Ministry of Health of the Republic of Tatarstan; Kazan State Medical Academy – branch of the Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education, Ministry of Health; Institute of Fundamental Medicine and Biology of Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University of Russia

Abstract

   Introduction. Surgical intervention remains the main method for treatment of the oral mucosa cancer. The generally accepted standard of the resection boundary that provides optimal local control is 5 mm. Adequate boundaries of indentation and choice of the reconstruction method are important issues facing specialists in head and neck tumors.   Aim. To evaluate parameters of the resection edge in the surgical treatment of malignant neoplasms of the oral mucosa depending on the method of eliminating of the post-resection defect and its effect on the frequency of local relapse.   Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis included 168 primary patients (50 % men and 50 % women) who received surgical treatment in the head and neck tumor department of the Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary of the ministry of Health of the Republic of Bashkortostan (ufa) from 2019 to 2023. The median age of patients was 63 years (interquartile range (IQR) 55–69 years). most often, the primary tumor was located in the tongue – in 59.5 % (100/168) of cases. According to the method of post-resection defect removal, the patients were divided into 3 groups. In group 1, reconstruction was performed with local tissues (n = 71), in group 2 – with pedicle flaps (n = 41), and in group 3 – with revascularized flaps (n = 56). The median follow-up period was 18 months (IQR 8–28 months).   Results. Resection boundaries in group 1 were 7.0 mm (IQR 5.0–12.5 mm), in group 2 – 6.5 mm (IQR 5–13 mm), and in group 3 – 12.5 mm (IQR 7.5–15.0 mm). The overall frequency of near/positive resection boundaries was 14.8 % (25/168). In group 1, it was 15.5 % (11/71), in group 2 – 19.5 % (8/41), in group 3 – 10.7 % (6/56). According to the analysis, relapse of the disease after radical treatment was noted in 32 % (55/168) of patients, of which 14.8 % (25/168) had a local relapse, 12.5 % (21/168) had a regional relapse, and 5.4 % (9/168) developed distant metastases. The frequency of local relapse in group 1 was 18.3 % (13/71), in group 2 – 23.8 % (10/41), in group 3 – 5.5 % (3/56). According to the analysis data, statistically significant differences in the boundary of indentation in the groups were revealed depending on the reconstruction method (p = 0.005).   Conclusion. Based on the results of the present retrospective analysis, the choice of reconstruction method affects the resection boundary in real clinical practice. Limitations in the surgical indentation that surgeon faces when choosing a method for eliminating a post-resection defect are demonstrated.

Publisher

Publishing House ABV Press

Reference22 articles.

1. The state of oncological care for the population of Russia in 2020. Ed. by A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinsky, A.O. Shakhzadova. Moscow: P.A. Herzen Moscow State Medical Research Institute – branch of the Federal State Budgetary Institution “NMIC of Radiology” of the Ministry of Health of Russia, 2021. 239 p. (In Russ.).

2. Zanoni D.K., Montero P.H., Migliacci J.C. et al. Survival outcomes after treatment of cancer of the oral cavity (1985–2015). Oral Oncol 2019;90:115–21. DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2019.02.001

3. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Head and neck cancers. Version 3. 2021. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/head-and-neck.pdf.

4. Clinical recommendations “Malignant neoplasms of the oral cavity”. 2020. Available from: https://oncology-association.ru/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/zno_polosti_rta.pdf. (In Riss.).

5. Jang J.Y., Choi N., Jeong H.S. Surgical extent for oral cancer: emphasis on a cut-off value for the resection margin status: a narrative literature review. Cancers (Basel) 2022;14(22):5702. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14225702

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3