Stratification of surgical margin distances by the millimeter on local recurrence in oral cavity cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kurtis YoungHannah BulosanCarley C KidaArnaud F BewleyMarianne AbouyaredAndrew C BirkelandPublished in: Head & neck (2023)
There are limited data supporting the commonly suggested 5 mm margin cutoff as the optimum value in defining clear margins in oral cancer. A database search of Pubmed/Medline, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost was performed from inception to June 2022. A random-effects model was chosen for this meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed throughout this study. Seven studies met study criteria (2215 patients). The risk ratio was significantly higher for margins <5 mm when compared to those ≥5 mm (2.09 (95%CI: 1.53-2.86, I 2 = 0.47)). Subgroup analysis (I 2 = 0.15) of margin distances of 0.0-0.9, 1.0-1.9, 2.0-2.9, 3.0-3.9, and 4.0-4.9 mm calculated risk ratios for local recurrence of 2.96, 2.01, 2.17, 1.8, and 0.98, respectively. Margins between 4.0 and 4.9 mm had similar risk ratios for local recurrence compared to ≥5 mm, while margins <4.0 were significantly higher.
Keyphrases
- meta analyses
- systematic review
- end stage renal disease
- randomized controlled trial
- chronic kidney disease
- public health
- free survival
- squamous cell carcinoma
- ejection fraction
- peritoneal dialysis
- papillary thyroid
- electronic health record
- clinical trial
- big data
- clinical practice
- artificial intelligence
- deep learning
- squamous cell
- patient reported
- breast cancer risk