Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:41:03.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cervical node metastases in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: prospective analysis of prevalence and distribution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2006

Jemy Jose ,
Andrew P. Coatesworth ,
Colin Johnston  and
Ken MacLennan
Jemy Jose
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK.
Andrew P. Coatesworth
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, York District Hospital, York, UK.
Colin Johnston
Affiliation:
Cancer Research UK Clinical Cancer Center, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Ken MacLennan
Affiliation:
Cancer Research UK Clinical Cancer Center, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The treatment of cervical lymph node metastases is an important part of the management of oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer. Metastases are already clinically present in 61 per cent (+ or −2.6 per cent) of patients at presentation. Previous studies concerning the prevalence and distribution of neck node metastases in oropharyngeal carcinoma have been retrospective, and little or no information is available about the histopathological methods used.

This study has prospectively analysed 85 neck dissection specimens in 72 consecutive patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, both with clinically N0 and N+ve necks, to identify the prevalence and distribution of cervical metastases. We have used a technique to separate the neck dissection into nodal levels per-operatively, and then embedded the entire specimen for histological examination to avoid missing metastatic disease in small lymph nodes (<3mm diameter).

Keywords

Carcinoma Squamous CellLymphatic MetastasisOropharyngeal Neoplasms
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 116 , Issue 11 , November 2002 , pp. 925 - 928
Copyright
© Royal Society of Medicine Press Limited 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)