Nobis Christopher-Philipp, Otto Sven, Grigorieva Tamara, Alnaqbi Mohamed, Troeltzsch Matthias, Schöpe Jakob, Wagenpfeil Stefan, Ehrenfeld Michael, Wolff Klaus-Dietrich, Kesting Marco Rainer
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität Munich, Ismaninger Str. 22, D-81675 Munich, Germany.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Lindwurmstraße 2a, D-80337 Munich, Germany.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017 Apr;45(4):579-584. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.01.008. Epub 2017 Jan 25.
Elective neck dissection (END) is a common primary treatment strategy for oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC), although uncertainty remains regarding the necessary extent of END for strictly unilateral early stage OTSCC. The authors evaluated two END variations, unilateral and bilateral, to determine the optimal extent.
A retrospective cohort study was performed on patient data from two departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery. All previously untreated patients from both clinics who were diagnosed with early-stage (pT1-2) unilateral OTSCC were included. The following variables were collected: age, gender, END type/extent, tumor localization, later nodal metastasis, and TNM status. Statistical analyses were performed (p < 0.05).
A total of 150 patients were identified, 105 receiving unilateral END and 45 bilateral END. The rates of postoperative positive lymph nodes were 21.9% for ipsilateral END and 26.7% for bilateral END (bilateral END: all positive nodes ipsilateral). In all, 14 patients in the ipsilateral group developed nodal metastasis during tumor aftercare (11 patients ipsilateral, 3 patients contralateral neck). In the bilateral group, nodal metastasis was later observed in 4 cases (8.9%; 3 cases ipsilateral, 1 case contralateral neck). Statistical analysis could not detect significant differences between the END procedures.
As both procedures lead to similar results in preventing or omitting possible later nodal metastasis, the two methods seem to be valuable alternatives. In conclusion, we recommend bilateral END because of advantages with regard to oncologic safety and esthetic outcome, but the decision for END should always be according to the patient's general health status, comorbidities, and individual tumor risk profile.
选择性颈清扫术(END)是口腔舌鳞状细胞癌(OTSCC)常见的主要治疗策略,尽管对于严格单侧早期OTSCC患者进行END的必要范围仍存在不确定性。作者评估了两种END术式,即单侧和双侧,以确定最佳范围。
对来自两个口腔颌面外科科室的患者数据进行回顾性队列研究。纳入了两个诊所所有先前未接受治疗且被诊断为早期(pT1-2)单侧OTSCC的患者。收集了以下变量:年龄、性别、END术式/范围、肿瘤定位、后期淋巴结转移及TNM分期。进行了统计学分析(p < 0.05)。
共确定了150例患者,其中105例接受单侧END,45例接受双侧END。同侧END术后阳性淋巴结率为21.9%,双侧END为26.7%(双侧END:所有阳性淋巴结均在同侧)。同侧组共有14例患者在肿瘤随访期间出现淋巴结转移(11例同侧,3例对侧颈部)。双侧组中,后期有4例(8.9%)出现淋巴结转移(3例同侧,1例对侧颈部)。统计学分析未发现两种END术式之间存在显著差异。
由于两种术式在预防或避免可能的后期淋巴结转移方面产生相似的结果,这两种方法似乎都是有价值的选择。总之,由于在肿瘤学安全性和美学效果方面具有优势,我们推荐双侧END,但END的决策应始终根据患者的一般健康状况、合并症及个体肿瘤风险情况来决定。