在T1和T2肿瘤中,使用锋利的解剖与单极电刀切除口腔鳞状细胞癌后的组织病理学边缘的比较。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY Surgical Oncology-Oxford Pub Date : 2023-10-24 DOI:10.1016/j.suronc.2023.102010
Katharina Thesesa Obermeier, Paris Liokatis, Wenko Smolka
{"title":"在T1和T2肿瘤中,使用锋利的解剖与单极电刀切除口腔鳞状细胞癌后的组织病理学边缘的比较。","authors":"Katharina Thesesa Obermeier,&nbsp;Paris Liokatis,&nbsp;Wenko Smolka","doi":"10.1016/j.suronc.2023.102010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The study aims to compare histopathological margins after resection of oral squamous cell carcinoma<span><span> (OSCC) with different surgical techniques: conventional sharp resection (SR) with scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery<span> (ME). Hence, the question arises whether thermal damage by performing monopolar electrocautery surgery will lead to close margins more frequently than by using scalpels. 152 patients were included in this study. All patients received a primary tumor resection either performed with SR or with ME. Surgical margins were distributed into two groups: ≥5 mm (clear margins) and &lt; 5 mm (close or involved margins). For comparing homogeneous groups, we considered tumor localizations, diameter and depth of invasion. The results were statistically analyzed by applying the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-U-Test. The distribution of tumor diameter and depth of invasion was equal in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the amount of free surgical margins using SR or ME (p = 0.884). According to this study, the use of the monopolar electrocautery for tumor resection in the </span></span>oral cavity does not increase the rate of compromised resection margins compared to the conventional scalpel.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":51185,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Oncology-Oxford","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of histopathological margins after resection of oral squamous cell carcinoma using sharp dissection versus mono-polar electrocautery in T1 and T2 tumors\",\"authors\":\"Katharina Thesesa Obermeier,&nbsp;Paris Liokatis,&nbsp;Wenko Smolka\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.suronc.2023.102010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The study aims to compare histopathological margins after resection of oral squamous cell carcinoma<span><span> (OSCC) with different surgical techniques: conventional sharp resection (SR) with scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery<span> (ME). Hence, the question arises whether thermal damage by performing monopolar electrocautery surgery will lead to close margins more frequently than by using scalpels. 152 patients were included in this study. All patients received a primary tumor resection either performed with SR or with ME. Surgical margins were distributed into two groups: ≥5 mm (clear margins) and &lt; 5 mm (close or involved margins). For comparing homogeneous groups, we considered tumor localizations, diameter and depth of invasion. The results were statistically analyzed by applying the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-U-Test. The distribution of tumor diameter and depth of invasion was equal in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the amount of free surgical margins using SR or ME (p = 0.884). According to this study, the use of the monopolar electrocautery for tumor resection in the </span></span>oral cavity does not increase the rate of compromised resection margins compared to the conventional scalpel.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51185,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Oncology-Oxford\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Oncology-Oxford\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096074042300110X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Oncology-Oxford","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096074042300110X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在比较口腔鳞状细胞癌(OSCC)切除术后不同手术技术的组织病理学边缘:手术刀常规尖锐切除术(SR)与单极电切术(ME)。因此,出现了一个问题,即进行单极电烙术的热损伤是否会比使用手术刀更频繁地导致边缘闭合。152名患者被纳入本研究。所有患者均接受了SR或ME原发性肿瘤切除术。手术切缘分为两组:≥5 mm(净切缘)和<5 mm(闭合或受累切缘)。为了比较同质组,我们考虑了肿瘤的定位、直径和侵袭深度。通过应用Wilcoxon-Mann--Whitney-U测试对结果进行统计分析。两组肿瘤直径和浸润深度分布相同。使用SR或ME的游离手术切缘数量之间没有统计学上的显著差异(p=0.884)。根据这项研究,与传统手术刀相比,使用单极电刀在口腔中进行肿瘤切除不会增加切除切缘受损的比率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of histopathological margins after resection of oral squamous cell carcinoma using sharp dissection versus mono-polar electrocautery in T1 and T2 tumors

The study aims to compare histopathological margins after resection of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) with different surgical techniques: conventional sharp resection (SR) with scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery (ME). Hence, the question arises whether thermal damage by performing monopolar electrocautery surgery will lead to close margins more frequently than by using scalpels. 152 patients were included in this study. All patients received a primary tumor resection either performed with SR or with ME. Surgical margins were distributed into two groups: ≥5 mm (clear margins) and < 5 mm (close or involved margins). For comparing homogeneous groups, we considered tumor localizations, diameter and depth of invasion. The results were statistically analyzed by applying the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-U-Test. The distribution of tumor diameter and depth of invasion was equal in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the amount of free surgical margins using SR or ME (p = 0.884). According to this study, the use of the monopolar electrocautery for tumor resection in the oral cavity does not increase the rate of compromised resection margins compared to the conventional scalpel.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Surgical Oncology-Oxford
Surgical Oncology-Oxford 医学-外科
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
169
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Surgical Oncology is a peer reviewed journal publishing review articles that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in surgical oncology and related fields of interest. Articles represent a spectrum of current technology in oncology research as well as those concerning clinical trials, surgical technique, methods of investigation and patient evaluation. Surgical Oncology publishes comprehensive Reviews that examine individual topics in considerable detail, in addition to editorials and commentaries which focus on selected papers. The journal also publishes special issues which explore topics of interest to surgical oncologists in great detail - outlining recent advancements and providing readers with the most up to date information.
期刊最新文献
Advances in the management of regionally metastatic melanoma Safe and beneficial outcomes of pancreaticogastrostomy with endoscopic transgastric drainage for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy “Prepectoral tissue expanders without mesh as a bridge to delayed autologous breast reconstruction: Experience at a single academic center” Editorial Board Oncologic and functional outcomes following robot assisted radical prostatectomy: 15-Year experience in a Latin American referral center
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1