ArticleOral oncology2023
Variance in 3D anatomic localization of surgical margins based on conventional margin labeling in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Oral oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A multimodal biological margin risk index predicts recurrence after neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- How far are we off? Analyzing the accuracy of surgical margin relocation in the head and neck.Head & neck · 2024Article
- Virtual 3D Specimen Mapping in Head & Neck Oncologic Surgery.The Laryngoscope · 2024Article
- Augmented-Reality Surgery to Guide Head and Neck Cancer Re-resection: A Feasibility and Accuracy Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Development of an augmented reality guidance system for head and neck cancer resection.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIn head and neck cancer (HNC), positive margins are strongly predictive of treatment failure. We sought to measure the accuracy of localization of margin sampling sites based on conventional anatomic labels using a digital 3D-model.
methodsPreoperative CT scans for 9 patients with HNC treated operatively at our institution were imported into a multiplanar radiology software, which was used to render a digital 3D model of each tumor intended to represent the resection specimen. Surgical margin labels recorded during the operative case were collected from pathology records. Margin labels (N = 64) were presented to participating physicians.Participants were asked to mark the anatomic location of each surgical margin using the 3D-model and corresponding radiographic planes for reference.For each individual margin, the 3D coordinates of each participant's marker were used to calculate a mean localization point called the geometric centroid. Mean distance from individual markers to the centroid was compared between participantsand margin types.
resultsAmongst 7 surgeons, markers were placed a mean distance of 12.6 mm ([SD] = 7.5) from the centroid.Deep margins were marked with a greater mean distance than mucosal/skin margins (19.6 [24.8] mm vs. 15.3 [14.9] mm, p = 0.034). When asked to relocate a margin following re-resection, surgeons marked a point an average of 20.6 [12.4] mm from their first marker with a range of 3.9- 45.1 mm.
conclusionsRetrospective localization of conventionally labeled margins is an imprecise process with variability across the care team. Future interventions targeting margin documentation and communication may improve sampling precision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.