Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Section Margins (section + margin)
Selected AbstractsSurgical margin determination in head and neck oncology: Current clinical practice.HEAD & NECK: JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES & SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, Issue 11 2005Neck Society Member Survey, The results of an International American Head Abstract Background. Our aim was to investigate the ways in which surgeons who perform head and neck ablative procedures on a regular basis define margins, how they use frozen sections to evaluate margins, and the effect of chemoradiation on determining tumor margins. Methods. A custom-designed questionnaire was mailed to members of the American Head and Neck Society asking members how they evaluate and define tumor margins. Results. Of 1500 surveys mailed, 476 completed surveys were received. The most common response for distance of a clear pathologic margin was >5 mm on microscopic evaluation. A margin containing carcinoma in situ was considered a positive margin by most, but most did not consider a margin containing dysplasia a positive margin. When initial frozen section margins are positive for tumor and further resection results in negative frozen section margins, 90% consider the patient's margin negative. Most surgeons sample the frozen section from the surgical bed rather than from the main specimen. Nearly half use wider margins when resecting tumors treated with neoadjuvant therapy. When resecting recurrent or residual tumors treated with previous chemoradiation therapy, most resect to the pretreatment margin. Conclusions. No uniform criteria to define a clear surgical margin exist among practicing head and neck surgeons. Most head and neck surgeons consider margins clear if resection completed after an initial positive frozen section margin reveals negative margins, but this view is not shared by all. Most surgeons take frozen sections from the surgical bed; however, error may occur when identifying the positive margin within the surgical bed. The definition of a clear tumor margin after chemoradiation is unclear. These questions could be addressed in a multicenter prospective trial. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck27: XXX,XXX, 2005 [source] Mohs Micrographic Excision of Melanoma Using ImmunostainsDERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, Issue 8 2000Mark J. Zalla MD Background. Mohs excision of melanoma remains controversial, in part because of concerns regarding evaluation of frozen section margins. Several immunohistochemical stains are available for melanoma that can be used on frozen sections. Objective. To review our experience with Mohs micrographic excision of melanoma using immunostains. Methods. Sixty-eight patients were treated, including 46 with melanoma in situ and 22 with invasive melanoma, 62 of which were on the head or neck. HMB-45, MEL-5, Melan-A (A-103), and S-100 stains were employed. Results. Sixty-seven of 68 tumors were excised to clear margins, requiring an average of 2.0 layers. Immunostains greatly enhanced detection of melanoma on frozen sections. The average margin required for clearance of in situ melanoma was 8.3 mm and of invasive melanoma was 11.1 mm. Only 23 of 46 (50%) in situ melanomas were clear with ,6 mm margins; 15 mm margins were required to clear 96% of the tumors. Eleven of 22 (50%) invasive melanomas were clear with ,6 mm margins; 26 mm margins were required to clear 95% of the tumors. Melan-A (A-103) was the most consistently crisp and easily interpreted immunostain. Conclusions. Mohs excision of melanoma using immunostains can be useful, especially for tumors on the head and neck. For routine excision, margins wider than those currently recommended may be required to ensure tumor clearance. We recommend that (1) biopsies be stained preoperatively for Melan-A and/or HMB-45, (2) a debulking layer be obtained for permanent sections prior to Mohs layers, and positive and negative control specimens from the tumor and distant skin should be employed for comparison of staining patterns. Large-scale prospective studies of in situ and invasive melanoma on the head and neck are necessary. [source] Surgical margin determination in head and neck oncology: Current clinical practice.HEAD & NECK: JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES & SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, Issue 11 2005Neck Society Member Survey, The results of an International American Head Abstract Background. Our aim was to investigate the ways in which surgeons who perform head and neck ablative procedures on a regular basis define margins, how they use frozen sections to evaluate margins, and the effect of chemoradiation on determining tumor margins. Methods. A custom-designed questionnaire was mailed to members of the American Head and Neck Society asking members how they evaluate and define tumor margins. Results. Of 1500 surveys mailed, 476 completed surveys were received. The most common response for distance of a clear pathologic margin was >5 mm on microscopic evaluation. A margin containing carcinoma in situ was considered a positive margin by most, but most did not consider a margin containing dysplasia a positive margin. When initial frozen section margins are positive for tumor and further resection results in negative frozen section margins, 90% consider the patient's margin negative. Most surgeons sample the frozen section from the surgical bed rather than from the main specimen. Nearly half use wider margins when resecting tumors treated with neoadjuvant therapy. When resecting recurrent or residual tumors treated with previous chemoradiation therapy, most resect to the pretreatment margin. Conclusions. No uniform criteria to define a clear surgical margin exist among practicing head and neck surgeons. Most head and neck surgeons consider margins clear if resection completed after an initial positive frozen section margin reveals negative margins, but this view is not shared by all. Most surgeons take frozen sections from the surgical bed; however, error may occur when identifying the positive margin within the surgical bed. The definition of a clear tumor margin after chemoradiation is unclear. These questions could be addressed in a multicenter prospective trial. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck27: XXX,XXX, 2005 [source] Prediction of recurrence after treatment for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: the role of human papillomavirus testing and age at conisationBJOG : AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 11 2006J Verguts Objectives, The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) DNA (HR-HPV DNA test) postconisation as prediction of recurrent or residual cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesions (CIN2+) in a prospective study and to compare this with follow-up cytology and the marginal status of the excised tissue. Design, Prospective follow-up study. Setting, Unselected women presenting at colposcopy clinic of University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Leuven. Population, Seventy-two women treated with conisation for CIN2 or CIN3. Methods, Women were followed by HR-HPV DNA test (Hybrid Capture II test of Digene®) every 3 to 6 months. The same vial was used for cytology and the HR-HPV DNA test (SurePathÔ). All women were further followed by colposcopy and cytology for 24 months at 6-month intervals. The outcome of the study was presence of >CIN2, proven with colposcopy-directed biopsy occurring within 24 months after treatment. HR-HPV status was correlated with recurrent or residual CIN2+. Main outcome measures, Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and diagnostic odds ratios to predict treatment failure or cure were computed for HR-HPV testing, marginal status and follow-up cytology. HR-HPV status was also correlated with section margins postconisation and with the first cervical smear. Results, In 6 of the 72 treated women (8%), residual or recurrent CIN occurred. Women with recurrence were significantly older than women without a recurrence (51.5 ± 9.6 versus 39.8 ± 12.2 years, P= 0.007). All six women with recurrence were HR-HPV positive, four had a positive follow-up smear (,atypical squamous cells of uncertain significance = ASCUS+) and only two had involved section margins. Among the 66 cured women, 15 were HR-HPV positive, 6 had an abnormal smear and 12 had positive section margins. Sensitivity of cytology, positive section margins and HR-HPV DNA positivity was 66.7, 33.3 and 100% to predict treatment failure. Specificity of the three tests was, respectively, 90.9, 81.8 and 77.3%. Women with HR-HPV DNA at 3 to 6 months showed recurrent or residual CIN in 15% (2/13) if they had normal follow-up Pap smears and in 50% (4/8) if they had abnormal Pap smears. Margin status was not statistically significantly associated with human papillomavirus status. Conclusion, Persistence or clearance of HR-HPV DNA is an early valid prognostic marker of failure or cure after treatment for CIN2+ and is more accurate than cytology or section margin status at the time of conisation. The absence of HR-HPV DNA has a 100% negative predictive value. Higher age at conisation may be a previously unrecognised risk factor for recurrence. [source] | ||||||||||