ArticleCureus2024
Efficacy of Submandibular Gland Excision Versus Preservation During Supraomohyoid Neck Dissection for T1, T2, and N0 Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Submandibular gland preservation versus removal during neck dissection in oral squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe present study aims to observe the efficacy of submandibular gland excision vs. preservation during supraomohyoid neck dissection (SOHND) based on the postoperative outcomes for early oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) with clinically N0 neck and xerostomia. MATERIALS AND
methodsA pilot study was conducted to observe the efficacy of preservation vs. excision of the submandibular gland in early OSCC in 20 cases with an age range of 18-75 years. Intraoperative blood loss and time taken for level Ib lymph node dissection were compared. Histopathologically, lymph node yield (level Ib) was also compared. Postoperative follow-up up to four weeks and xerostomia assessment were done in both groups by using the Xerostomia Inventory score and Clinical Oral Dryness Score (CODS). Continuous and categorical data and their significance level were analyzed statistically.
resultsRoutine submandibular gland excision and preservation methods were used for level Ib lymph node dissection during SOHND. Comparative assessment between the two methods revealed that surgery duration and blood loss in the test group were significantly higher (p-value < 0.001) as compared to the control group. The incidence of xerostomia in both groups did not reveal any statistical difference.
conclusionSubmandibular gland preservation during SOHND in early OSCC leads to a slight increase in the time of dissection and blood loss is negligible and appears oncologically safer. No recurrence of intraglandular lymph nodes and zero incidence of xerostomia were the follow-up conclusions of the preservation method.
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.