Premium
Impact of resection margin status on outcome after salvage nasopharyngectomy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Author(s) -
Chan Jimmy Yu Wai,
Wei William Ignace
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
head and neck
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.012
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1097-0347
pISSN - 1043-3074
DOI - 10.1002/hed.24046
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , salvage surgery , nasopharyngeal carcinoma , resection , overall survival , head and neck , resection margin , margin (machine learning) , radiation therapy , computer science , machine learning
Background The purpose of this study was to present the postoperative local tumor control and survival with regard to the different resection margin statuses during salvage nasopharyngectomy. Methods We conducted a whole‐organ study of nasopharyngectomy specimens. Results Between 2005 and 2010, 126 patients underwent maxillary swing nasopharyngectomy. The T classification of the recurrent tumor was: T1, 23.8%; T2, 41.3%; T3, 28.6%; and T4, 6.3%. The chance of clear, close, and involved resection margins at nasopharyngectomy was 44.4%, 31.0%, and 24.6%, respectively. At follow‐up, the corresponding risk of local tumor recurrence after surgery was 10.7%, 38.5%, and 67.7%, respectively. The local tumor control was significantly worse in patients with involved margins compared with those with close margins ( p = .01), which was, in turn, significantly worse than those with clear margins ( p = .04). Conclusion The primary objective of salvage nasopharyngectomy is to achieve clear resection margins. Close and involved margins result in significantly inferior local tumor control and overall survival. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38 : E594–E599, 2016