[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-328839-105":59,"doc-detail-328839-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":127,"head_meta":129,"extra_data":131,"updated_unix":133},105,"en","tumor-bed-margins-versus-specimen-margins-in-oral-cavity-cancer-too-close-to-call","Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call?","","Routine intraoperative margin assessment guides oral cavity cancer surgery, yet the optimal sampling strategy remains debated. This retrospective cohort study evaluates a new oriented tumor bed margin (TBM) technique derived from Mohs, compared with specimen margin (SM) sampling after initial resection. Among 156 tongue or floor-of-mouth cancer patients, precision measures and margin-related clinicopathologic outcomes are analyzed alongside locoregional control, survival, and free-flap reconstruction rates.",{"@graph":69,"@context":126},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/tumor-bed-margins-versus-specimen-margins-in-oral-cavity-cancer-too-close-to-call/328839/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/tumor-bed-margins-versus-specimen-margins-in-oral-cavity-cancer-too-close-to-call/328839.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Levi","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-13","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118,122],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What is the study’s primary goal regarding tumor bed margins and specimen margins?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To determine the precision of an oriented technique for sampling tumor bed margins and evaluate its impact on survival and free-flap reconstruction rates.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were patients grouped in the retrospective cohort study?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Patients were divided into two groups: one using oriented TBM sampling with Vicryl sutures on both the tumor bed and specimen, and the other using specimen margins after initial resection.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What did the precision and survival analyses show between the two margin-sampling methods?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The oriented TBM approach showed 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in local control and local-regional control.",{"name":123,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":124},"How did the free flap reconstruction rate differ between groups?",{"text":125,"@type":113},"Free flap surgeries were significantly less frequent with the oriented TBM technique (30%) compared with the SM method (64.5%).","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":128,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":130,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":132,"site_id":62},328839,1790095153,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":135},{"doc_id":132,"user_id":136,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":44,"language":143,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":147,"read_time":148,"preview_page_count":4},7971461740909,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call?  \nNoémie Villemure-Poliquin, MD, MSc, FRCSC 1 ,Ève-Marie Roy, MD 1 , Sally Nguyen, MD, FRCSC2, Michel Beauchemin, MD, FRCPC3,  \nand Nathalie Audet, MDCM, FRCSC 1   \nAbstract  \nJournal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery  \nVolume 53: 1–9  \n© The Author(s) 2024  \nArticle reuse guidelines: [sagepub.com/journals-permissions](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[ ](sagepub.com/journals-permissions)[DOI: 10.1177/19160216241278653](DOI: 10.1177/19160216241278653)[ ](DOI: 10.1177/19160216241278653)[journals.sagepub.com/home/ohn](journals.sagepub.com/home/ohn)  \nIntroduction. The routine assessment of intraoperative margins has long been the standard of care for oral cavity cancers. However, there is a controversy surrounding the best method for sampling surgical margins. The aim of our study is to determine the precision of a new technique for sampling tumor bed margins (TBMs), to evaluate the impact on survival and the rate of free flap reconstructions.  \nMethods. This retrospective cohort study involved 156 patients with primary cancer of the tongue or floor of the mouth who underwent surgery as initial curative treatment. Patients were separated into 2 groups: one using an oriented TBM derived from Mohs’ technique, where the margins are taken from the tumor bed and identified with Vicryl sutures on both the specimen and the tumor bed, and the other using a specimen margins (SMs) driven technique, where the margins are taken from the specimen after the initial resection. Clinicopathologic features, including margin status, were compared for both groups and correlated with locoregional control. Precision of per-operative TBM sampling method was obtained.  \nResults. A total of 156 patients were included in the study, of which 80 were in TBM group and 76 were in SM group. Precision analysis showed that the oriented TBM technique pertained a 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and an 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival analysis revealed nonstatistically significant differences in both local control (86.88% vs 83.50%; P = .81) as well as local-regional control (82.57% vs 72.32%; P = .21). There was a significant difference in the rate of free flap-surgeries between the 2 groups (30% vs 64.5%; P \u003C .001).  \nConclusion. Our described oriented TBM technique has demonstrated reduced risk of free flap reconstructive surgery, increased precision, and similar prognostic in terms of local control, locoregional control, and disease-free survival when compared to the SM method.  \nKeywords  \nsquamous cell carcinoma, margin, oral cavity cancer, locoregional recurrence, free flap surgery  \nReceived February 15, 2024; accepted July 26, 2024.  \n1 Département d’ophtalmologie et d’oto-rhino-laryngologie – chirurgie cervico-faciale, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada 2Département de chirurgie, Service d’oto-rhino-laryngologie – chirurgie cervico-faciale, CISSS de l’Outaouais, Centre affilié universitaire avec l’Université McGill, Gatineau, QC, Canada  \n3Département d’anatomo-pathologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada  \nCorresponding Author:  \nNathalie Audet, MDCM, FRCSC, Département d’ophtalmologie et d’oto-rhino-laryngologie – chirurgie cervico-faciale, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, 2325 rue de l’Université, Québec, QC G1V OA6, Canada.  \nEmail: [nathalie.audet@fmed.ulaval.ca](nathalie.audet@fmed.ulaval.ca)  \nCreative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0  \nLicense ([https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified","cbCaihOffl4YmX4C","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihOffl4YmX4C","pdf",1094806,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n# Methods\n# Results\n# Conclusion\n# Keywords\n# Received and Accepted Information","[{\"question\":\"What is the study’s primary goal regarding tumor bed margins and specimen margins?\",\"answer\":\"To determine the precision of an oriented technique for sampling tumor bed margins and evaluate its impact on survival and free-flap reconstruction rates.\"},{\"question\":\"How were patients grouped in the retrospective cohort study?\",\"answer\":\"Patients were divided into two groups: one using oriented TBM sampling with Vicryl sutures on both the tumor bed and specimen, and the other using specimen margins after initial resection.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the precision and survival analyses show between the two margin-sampling methods?\",\"answer\":\"The oriented TBM approach showed 50% sensitivity, 96.6% specificity, 80% positive predictive value, and 87.5% negative predictive value. Survival comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in local control and local-regional control.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the free flap reconstruction rate differ between groups?\",\"answer\":\"Free flap surgeries were significantly less frequent with the oriented TBM technique (30%) compared with the SM method (64.5%).\"}]","Tumor Bed Margins Versus Specimen Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: Too Close to Call? | PDF",1789981280,23]