Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Prognostic Value of Pathological Resection Margin Distance in Squamous Cell Cancer of the Vulva
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Prognostic Value of Pathological Resection Margin Distance in Squamous Cell Cancer of the Vulva
Do you wish to request the book?
Prognostic Value of Pathological Resection Margin Distance in Squamous Cell Cancer of the Vulva
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Prognostic Value of Pathological Resection Margin Distance in Squamous Cell Cancer of the Vulva
2011
Overview
Background
A tumor-free resection margin of at least 8 mm is considered state of the art in vulvar cancer. This standard is based on small and heterogeneous patient cohorts, and its implementation can result in mutilation.
Methods
One hundred two consecutive patients with primary squamous cell vulvar cancer were analyzed. All patients received resection of the primary tumor and the inguinofemoral lymph nodes via three separate incisions, resulting in complete tumor resection. Median follow-up was 31 months. Minimal margin distances were pathologically determined in all dimensions after fixation.
Results
Median age of the patients was 62 years; 38.2% had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I, 17.6% stage II, 24.4% stage III, and 8.8% stage IV disease. The median minimal resection margin was 5 mm (range 0.5–25 mm). Sixteen patients (15.6%) developed disease recurrence, of whom 10 (62.5%) at the vulva. Margin distance had no significant impact on disease-free survival when analyzed continuously (
p
= 0.388). When cases were divided into three subgroups of <3 mm (28.4%), ≥3 to <8 mm (42.2%), and ≥8 mm (29.4%) resection margin, neither univariate nor multivariate analysis revealed a difference in disease-free survival. There was no significant difference between any of the subgroups regarding tumor stages and adjuvant radiotherapy of the vulva. These results were independent of the direction of the minimal margin distance and consistent when only vulvar recurrences were analyzed.
Conclusions
A tumor-free resection margin is essential for locoregional control in vulvar cancer. However, in this large, single-center study, we could not demonstrate any prognostic impact of pathological margin distance.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag,Springer Nature B.V
