Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Versus Elective Neck Dissection: Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes in Clinically Node-Negative Tongue Cancer
Objectives. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer.Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single...
Saved in:
Published in | Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology Vol. 15; no. 1; pp. 107 - 114 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Korea (South)
Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
01.02.2022
대한이비인후과학회 |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1976-8710 2005-0720 |
DOI | 10.21053/ceo.2020.02411 |
Cover
Abstract | Objectives. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer.Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group.Results. The overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS.Conclusion. SLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma. |
---|---|
AbstractList | The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer.OBJECTIVESThe aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer.This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group.METHODSThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group.The overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS.RESULTSThe overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS.SLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma.CONCLUSIONSLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group. Results The overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS. Conclusion SLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Objectives. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer. Methods. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group. Results. The overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS. Conclusion. SLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma. KCI Citation Count: 0 The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically node-negative (cN0) tongue cancer. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cN0 tongue cancer from a single institution, including 91 patients in the SLNB group and 120 patients in the END group. The overall recurrence rate showed no significant difference between the two groups. The regional control rate was also comparable between the two groups (P=0.490). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was slightly better in the SLNB group than in the END group (P=0.427). The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 89.9% in the SLNB group versus 91.9% in the END group (P=0.737). In a propensity-matched subgroup analysis, the type of neck management did not affect RFS or OS. SLNB showed non-inferior oncologic outcomes compared to END in patients with cN0 tongue squamous cell carcinoma. |
Author | Jin, Hokyung Baek, Chung-Hwan Jeong, Han-Sin Heo, Yujin Son, Young-Ik Chung, Man Ki Park, Woori |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Woori orcidid: 0000-0001-9032-6685 surname: Park fullname: Park, Woori – sequence: 2 givenname: Hokyung orcidid: 0000-0002-7278-0320 surname: Jin fullname: Jin, Hokyung – sequence: 3 givenname: Yujin orcidid: 0000-0001-9577-6802 surname: Heo fullname: Heo, Yujin – sequence: 4 givenname: Han-Sin orcidid: 0000-0003-4652-0573 surname: Jeong fullname: Jeong, Han-Sin – sequence: 5 givenname: Young-Ik orcidid: 0000-0003-0570-6953 surname: Son fullname: Son, Young-Ik – sequence: 6 givenname: Man Ki orcidid: 0000-0002-1435-7786 surname: Chung fullname: Chung, Man Ki – sequence: 7 givenname: Chung-Hwan orcidid: 0000-0003-4430-5546 surname: Baek fullname: Baek, Chung-Hwan |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33781056$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002812993$$DAccess content in National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) |
BookMark | eNp1ksFv0zAUxiM0xLrBmRvyEQ7pbCdOYg5Io2xQqWolKFwtx3npvDp2ZyeTeuUvn5uOiSFxerL9fb_39PydJSfWWUiStwRPKcEsu1DgphRTPMU0J-RFMqEYsxSXFJ8kE8LLIq1Kgk-TsxBuMS4Yw_mr5DTLyirai0ny-wfYXlswaLHvdjdo6RpAn7XbhT36BT4MAV0ZUL2-B7QEtUVfdAiHs7Mf0cLZTboG36GVVc64jVZoNfTKdRCQtmhmtNVKGrMfuekSNnIkraNxADSTVoF_nbxspQnw5rGeJz-vr9azb-li9XU-u1ykKqdZn1LVUMqLsq7zvK5aWhetlEoWrG7KooVCsho3PGegMqlUhpUCjqumjTuQnPI8O08-HLnWt2KrtHBSj3XjxNaLy-_rueA8i7uhUTs_ahsnb8XO6076_WgYL5zfCOl7rQwIVklZUFXRsiE5pySOxluApsyYlKSFyPp0ZO2GuoNGxYV7aZ5Bn79YfRNnuhcVx4SzLALePwK8uxsg9KLTQYEx0oIbgqAMlySvKD9I3_3d66nJnw-PgoujQHkXgof2SUKwGCMlYqTEIVJijFR0sH8cSvfyEIA4rDb_9T0AErHR6g |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_023_28550_y crossref_primary_10_3390_cancers16061153 crossref_primary_10_3390_biotech11010005 crossref_primary_10_1111_jop_13291 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40336_023_00552_w crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jcms_2023_12_012 crossref_primary_10_1017_S0022215122002043 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.05.008 10.1002/hed.23288 10.1016/j.bjoms.2017.07.007 10.1002/lary.27323 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.05.021 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80082-0 10.1056/nejmoa1506007 10.1007/s00405-009-0955-2 10.1002/jso.25493 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.07.016 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.07.020 10.1200/jco.2008.20.8777 10.1002/hed.2890070105 10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_213_17 10.1002/hed.23632 10.1016/j.anorl.2016.10.004 10.1016/j.wjorl.2016.05.008 10.1016/s1368-8375(98)00113-4 10.1016/j.oooo.2013.09.012 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.5.865 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.07.007 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Copyright © 2022 by Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 2022 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2022 by Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 2022 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 7X8 5PM DOA ACYCR |
DOI | 10.21053/ceo.2020.02411 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals Korean Citation Index |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic PubMed CrossRef |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 2005-0720 |
EndPage | 114 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_9933372 oai_doaj_org_article_58aa62c827d149218f29feed735aa1fe PMC8901953 33781056 10_21053_ceo_2020_02411 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | 29B 2WC 5-W 53G 5GY 8JR 8XY 9ZL AAYXX ACYCR ADBBV AENEX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AOIJS BAWUL BCNDV CITATION CS3 DIK DU5 E3Z EF. F5P GROUPED_DOAJ HYE KQ8 M48 O5R O5S OK1 PGMZT RNS RPM TR2 ADRAZ C1A M~E NPM 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-2cd22967bb44b8f2b6faaca65bd76fe6a5b0d945ec3acc30cce908df976a92943 |
IEDL.DBID | M48 |
ISSN | 1976-8710 |
IngestDate | Tue Nov 21 21:44:31 EST 2023 Wed Aug 27 01:31:00 EDT 2025 Thu Aug 21 18:34:37 EDT 2025 Thu Jul 10 18:52:48 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 22:55:34 EST 2025 Tue Jul 01 04:03:23 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:03:59 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Keywords | Sentinel Lymph Node Recurrence Neck Dissection |
Language | English |
License | This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c423t-2cd22967bb44b8f2b6faaca65bd76fe6a5b0d945ec3acc30cce908df976a92943 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2020.02411 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-9577-6802 0000-0002-1435-7786 0000-0001-9032-6685 0000-0003-4430-5546 0000-0002-7278-0320 0000-0003-4652-0573 0000-0003-0570-6953 |
OpenAccessLink | http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.21053/ceo.2020.02411 |
PMID | 33781056 |
PQID | 2507148293 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 8 |
ParticipantIDs | nrf_kci_oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_9933372 doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_58aa62c827d149218f29feed735aa1fe pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8901953 proquest_miscellaneous_2507148293 pubmed_primary_33781056 crossref_primary_10_21053_ceo_2020_02411 crossref_citationtrail_10_21053_ceo_2020_02411 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2022-02-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2022-02-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2022 text: 2022-02-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Korea (South) |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Korea (South) |
PublicationTitle | Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol |
PublicationYear | 2022 |
Publisher | Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 대한이비인후과학회 |
Publisher_xml | – name: Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery – name: 대한이비인후과학회 |
References | ref13 ref12 ref15 ref14 ref20 ref11 ref22 ref10 ref21 ref2 ref1 ref17 ref16 ref19 ref18 ref8 ref7 ref9 ref4 ref3 ref5 Schilling (ref6) 2015 |
References_xml | – ident: ref1 doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.05.008 – ident: ref8 doi: 10.1002/hed.23288 – ident: ref7 doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2017.07.007 – ident: ref18 doi: 10.1002/lary.27323 – ident: ref22 doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2018.05.021 – ident: ref4 doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80082-0 – start-page: 2777 volume-title: Sentinel European Node Trial (SENT): 3-year results of sentinel node biopsy in oral cancer year: 2015 ident: ref6 – ident: ref5 doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1506007 – ident: ref15 doi: 10.1007/s00405-009-0955-2 – ident: ref11 doi: 10.1002/jso.25493 – ident: ref13 doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.07.016 – ident: ref9 doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.07.020 – ident: ref10 doi: 10.1200/jco.2008.20.8777 – ident: ref3 doi: 10.1002/hed.2890070105 – ident: ref12 doi: 10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_213_17 – ident: ref14 doi: 10.1002/hed.23632 – ident: ref16 doi: 10.1016/j.anorl.2016.10.004 – ident: ref17 doi: 10.1016/j.wjorl.2016.05.008 – ident: ref2 doi: 10.1016/s1368-8375(98)00113-4 – ident: ref19 doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2013.09.012 – ident: ref21 doi: 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.5.865 – ident: ref20 doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.07.007 |
SSID | ssj0065504 |
Score | 2.269757 |
Snippet | Objectives. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in... The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in clinically... Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus elective neck dissection (END) in... |
SourceID | nrf doaj pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source |
StartPage | 107 |
SubjectTerms | neck dissection Original recurrence sentinel lymph node 이비인후과학 |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwELZQDxUXBOUVoMggDlzSJo4fSW-0tCqo3R7YSr1ZtuNsVxs51e7msNf-8o7t7KqLQFw4RUoyyWRmPPM5tj8j9IXltWVGs5Tkqk5pRSm0OW1SwWxFS86IDWQ6lyN-fk1_3rCbR1t9-TlhkR44Gu6QlUpxYkoiagDzUJAaUjWQ2EXBlMob67NvVmXrzlTMwRxwdxxPFhzenWeR1Ae6N6w4NGHRH8kOoDzl-VY9CrT9UGXcvPkT4vx94uSjSnT2HD0bICT-FlV_gZ5Yt4d2L4dB8pfo_pefAeRsiy9W4Cs86mqLj6fd3WKF_e-xfoFP25jn8MiaGf7ux-TD-oYjfNG5STqGdI2vnImJEV_1S4hLu8BThwce0bZdheemIzsJ1OF4DIK9xSc-iuav0PXZ6fjkPB22WkgN4KllSkxNSMWF1pRqMLHmjVJGcaZrwRvLFdNZXVFmTaGMKTJjbJWVdQP2VQCwaPEa7bjO2bcIQ1GsqPY8YlxQSgslckJ0ZmjTZNpwlaCDtcGlGXjI_XYYrYT-SPCQBA9J7yEZPJSgrxuBu0jB8fdbj70HN7d57uxwAiJKDhEl_xVRCfoM_pczMw3y_jjp5GwuoYfxQwKeKwpBEvRpHR4SGqQfZVHOdv1CEo-waQkwKkFvYrhs9AHJEtTmCRJbgbSl8PYVN70NpN9l5Zd2Fu_-xxe-R0-JX8URJp9_QDvLeW_3AVst9cfQjB4AF_EhBA priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals |
Title | Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Versus Elective Neck Dissection: Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes in Clinically Node-Negative Tongue Cancer |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33781056 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2507148293 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC8901953 https://doaj.org/article/58aa62c827d149218f29feed735aa1fe https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002812993 |
Volume | 15 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
ispartofPNX | Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 2022, 15(1), , pp.107-114 |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV3di9QwEA9ygvgifls_jig--NK1m-ajFUS8845Tbvce3IV7C0marMuW9my34L76lztJe6srK_hUaJsyZGYyv-lkfkHoNRsXlhnNYjJWRUxzSsHntIkFsznNOCM2kOlMpvxsTr9cssvfxwENE9juTe38eVLzphz9-L75AA7_3m9jBniQvjWhjY8kIwg4vs_3Jly4z8QmdFtS4ADF-xKz4CDOOOl5fvZ9YCdEBSZ_CDxV4_aB0L_3Uv4RnE7vojsDqsQfezO4h27Y6j66NRnq5g_Qz69-U1BlS3y-AfXhaV1YfLSsr9oN9n_MuhaflP3Sh6fWrPAnX6YPLQ_v8HldLeIZrOD4ojL9WokvujWYqm3xssIDtWhZbsJ346ldBDZxPIOBncXH3rCah2h-ejI7PouH0xdiAxBrHRNTEJJzoTWlOnNEc6eUUZzpQnBnuWI6KXLKrEmVMWlijM2TrHAwvwowF00foYOqruwThCFO5lR7ajEuKKWpEmNCdGKoc4k2XEVodD3h0gzU5P6EjFJCihI0JEFD0mtIBg1F6M12wFXPyvHvV4-8BreveTrtcKNuFnLwTskypTgxGREFZIyAehzJHaAHkTKlxs5G6BXoX67MMoz310UtV42EpOOzBIiXpoJE6OW1eUjwUV94UZWtu1YSD7ppBsgqQo97c9nKAyMzEJtHSOwY0o7Au0-q5bfAA57lvtszffo_wj1Dt4lv3Aj7zZ-jg3XT2RcAp9b6MPyGOAzO8gu1IB37 |
linkProvider | Scholars Portal |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sentinel+Lymph+Node+Biopsy+Versus+Elective+Neck+Dissection%3A+Long-Term+Oncologic+Outcomes+in+Clinically+Node-Negative+Tongue+Cancer&rft.jtitle=Clinical+and+experimental+otorhinolaryngology&rft.au=%EB%B0%95%EC%9A%B0%EB%A6%AC&rft.au=%EC%A7%84%ED%98%B8%EA%B2%BD&rft.au=%ED%97%88%EC%9C%A0%EC%A7%84&rft.au=%EC%A0%95%ED%95%9C%EC%8B%A0&rft.date=2022-02-01&rft.pub=%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EC%9D%B4%EB%B9%84%EC%9D%B8%ED%9B%84%EA%B3%BC%ED%95%99%ED%9A%8C&rft.issn=1976-8710&rft.eissn=2005-0720&rft.spage=107&rft.epage=114&rft_id=info:doi/10.21053%2Fceo.2020.02411&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_9933372 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1976-8710&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1976-8710&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1976-8710&client=summon |