ArticleHead & neck2024
How far are we off? Analyzing the accuracy of surgical margin relocation in the head and neck.
Article in Head & neck, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Label-free fluorescence lifetime imaging can distinguish cancer from healthy tissue in spontaneously occurring canine oral tumors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Augmented Reality-based Guidance with Deformable Registration in Head and Neck Tumor Resection.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPositive surgical margin rates remain high in head and neck cancer surgery. Relocation is challenging given the complex, three-dimensional (3D) anatomy.
methodsProspective, multi-institutional study to determine accuracy of head and neck surgeons and pathologists relocating margins on virtual 3D specimen models using written descriptions from pathology reports. Using 3D models of 10 head and neck surgical specimens, each participant relocated 20 mucosal margins (10 perpendicular, 10 shave).
resultsA total of 32 participants, 23 surgeons and 9 pathologists, marked 640 margins. Of the 320 marked perpendicular margins, 49.7% were greater than 1 centimeter from the true margin with a mean relocation error of 10.2 mm. Marked shave margins overlapped with the true margin a mean 54% of the time, with no overlap in 44 of 320 (13.8%) shave margins.
conclusionsSurgical margin relocation is imprecise and challenging even for experienced surgeons and pathologists. New communication technologies are needed.
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.