Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Jan 28:2:815606.
doi: 10.3389/froh.2021.815606. eCollection 2021.

Salvage Surgery in Recurrent Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Affiliations
Review

Salvage Surgery in Recurrent Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma

K S Rathan Shetty et al. Front Oral Health. .

Abstract

More than half of patients with oral cancer recur even after multimodality treatment and recurrent oral cancers carry a poorer prognosis when compared to other sites of head and neck. The best survival outcome in a recurrent setting is achieved by salvage surgery; however, objective criteria to select an ideal candidate for salvage surgery is difficult to frame, as the outcome depends on various treatment-, tumor-, and patient-related factors. The following is summarizes various tumor- and treatment-related factors that guide our decision-making to optimize oncologic and functional outcomes in surgical salvage for recurrent oral cancers. Short disease-free interval, advanced tumor stage (recurrent and primary), extracapsular spread and positive tumor margins in a recurrent tumor, regional recurrence, and multimodality treatment of primary tumor all portend worse outcomes after surgical salvage. Quality of life after surgical intervention has shown improvement over 1 year with a drastic drop in pain scores. Various trials are underway evaluating the combination of immunotherapy and surgical salvage in recurrent head and neck tumors, including oral cavity, which may widen our indications for salvage surgery with improved survival and preserved organ function.

Keywords: decision making; oral cancer; outcome; recurrent; salvage surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

    1. Torre LA, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends–an update. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. (2016) 25:16–27. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lydiatt DD, Robbins KT, Byers RM, Wolf PF. Treatment of stage I and II oral tongue cancer. Head Neck. (1993) 15:308–12. 10.1002/hed.2880150407 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zittel S, Moratin J, Horn D, Metzger K, Ristow O, Engel M, et al. . Clinical outcome and prognostic factors in recurrent oral squamous cell carcinoma after primary surgical treatment: a retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig. (2021). 10.1007/s00784-021-04186-y [Online ahead of print]. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grégoire V, Lefebvre JL, Licitra L, Felip E. EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Guidelines Working Group. Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. (2010) 21 Suppl 5:v184–6. 10.1093/annonc/mdq185 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tan HK, Giger R, Auperin A, Bourhis J, Janot F, Temam S. Salvage surgery after concomitant chemoradiation in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas - stratification for postsalvage survival. Head Neck. (2010) 32:139–47. 10.1002/hed.21159 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources