Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33869013›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2021

Performance of Intraoperative Assessment of Resection Margins in Oral Cancer Surgery: A Review of Literature.

Elisa M Barroso, Yassine Aaboubout, Lisette C van der Sar, Hetty Mast, Aniel Sewnaik, Jose A Hardillo, Ivo Ten Hove, Maria R Nunes Soares, Lars Ottevanger, Tom C Bakker Schut and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. High-ResolutionJournal of clinical medicine · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Elisa M BarrosoDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Yassine AabouboutDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Lisette C van der SarDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Hetty MastDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Aniel SewnaikDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Jose A HardilloDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Ivo Ten HoveDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Leiden UMC, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Maria R Nunes SoaresDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Lars OttevangerDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Tom C Bakker SchutDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Gerwin J PuppelsDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Senada KoljenovićDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAchieving adequate resection margins during oral cancer surgery is important to improve patient prognosis. Surgeons have the delicate task of achieving an adequate resection and safeguarding satisfactory remaining function and acceptable physical appearance, while relying on visual inspection, palpation, and preoperative imaging. Intraoperative assessment of resection margins (IOARM) is a multidisciplinary effort, which can guide towards adequate resections. Different forms of IOARM are currently used, but it is unknown how accurate these methods are in predicting margin status. Therefore, this review aims to investigate: 1) the IOARM methods currently used during oral cancer surgery, 2) their performance, and 3) their clinical relevance.

methodsA literature search was performed in the following databases: Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar (from inception to January 23, 2020). IOARM performance was assessed in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in predicting margin status, and the reduction of inadequate margins. Clinical relevance (i.e., overall survival, local recurrence, regional recurrence, local recurrence-free survival, disease-specific survival, adjuvant therapy) was recorded if available.

resultsEighteen studies were included in the review, of which 10 for soft tissue and 8 for bone. For soft tissue, defect-driven IOARM-studies showed the average accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 90.9%, 47.6%, and 84.4%, and specimen-driven IOARM-studies showed, 91.5%, 68.4%, and 96.7%, respectively. For bone, specimen-driven IOARM-studies performed better than defect-driven, with an average accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 96.6%, 81.8%, and 98%, respectively. For both, soft tissue and bone, IOARM positively impacts patient outcome.

conclusionIOARM improves margin-status, especially the specimen-driven IOARM has higher performance compared to defect-driven IOARM. However, this conclusion is limited by the low number of studies reporting performance results for defect-driven IOARM. The current methods suffer from inherent disadvantages, namely their subjective character and the fact that only a small part of the resection surface can be assessed in a short time span, causing sampling errors. Therefore, a solution should be sought in the field of objective techniques that can rapidly assess the whole resection surface.

Indexed as

bone tissuedefect-drivenintraoperative assessment (IOA)margin statusoral cancersoft tissuespecimen-drivensquamous cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID33869013
PMCPMC8044914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.