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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2024 Jan-Dec:53:19160216241300069.
doi: 10.1177/19160216241300069.

Submandibular Gland-Sparing Technique Versus En-Bloc Level IB Dissection in Oral Cavity Cancers with N0 Neck Status: A Randomized Controlled Trial

G Vetrivel  1 , Areej Moideen  1   2 , Bhinyaram Jat  1   3 , Prashant Durgapal  4 , Amit Kumar  1   2 , Amit Kumar Tyagi  1 , Sourabha Kumar Patro  3 , Kinjal Shankar Majumdar  1   5 , Vikramjit Singh  1 , Nivedhan Ravichandran  1   3 , Ankita Semwal  1 , Rachit Sood  1   2 , Ashutosh Hota  6 , Akhilesh Chandra Yadav  1 , M Ramesh Prasath  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Submandibular Gland-Sparing Technique Versus En-Bloc Level IB Dissection in Oral Cavity Cancers with N0 Neck Status: A Randomized Controlled Trial

G Vetrivel et al. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

Importance: Metastases to the submandibular gland (SMG) from oral cavity primaries are very rare. Hence, a gland-preserving level IB dissection technique is a feasible option without compromising the lymph node yield (LNY).

Objective: To assess the feasibility and noninferiority of the SMG-preserving dissection technique to the conventional en bloc removal of level IB in terms of LNY in patients with cN0 oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) undergoing elective neck dissection.

Design: Parallel-design, single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Tertiary care health care center-Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, AIIMS Rishikesh.

Participants: Thirty-eight (n = 38) participants with 46 (n = 46) neck dissection specimens of OSCC were randomly allocated (1:1) into gland-preserving (n1 = 23) and en bloc (n2 = 23) dissection groups.

Intervention: Elective neck dissection comparing SMG-sparing level IB dissection technique versus en bloc level IB dissection.

Main outcome measures: LNY, lymph node density, and level IB operative time in both groups were compared between groups (α < .05).

Results: Median LNY (P = .543) and lymph node density (P = 1.000) in level IB did not show significant differences between the groups. LNY in level IB by gland-preserving technique is also not inferior to the conventional en bloc dissection technique (mean difference = 0.217; 95% CI: [-0.597, 1.032]; P = .593). The mean level IB operative time is significantly longer in the gland-preserving group (P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: None of the examined SMGs were involved by the tumor. SMG-preserving technique is noninferior to the traditional technique of level IB clearance and can be used in elective neck dissections without compromising the LNY. Functional neck dissection has greatly evolved to decrease patient morbidity, and this method can be adopted in case-specific situations.

Trial registration: The trial was registered in the Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2022/05/042344) on May 2, 2023, https://ctri.nic.in/.

Keywords: metastases; neck dissection; oral cancer; organ preservation; squamous cell carcinoma; submandibular gland.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Graphical abstract
Graphical abstract
Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Modes of submandibular gland involvement by oral cavity malignant tumor.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Schematic diagram Level IB dissection in the study group [1—preglandular, 2—prefacial, 3—postfacial, 4—postglandular, 5—submandibular gland (SMG), 6—deep (to SMG) group]. SMG, submandibular gland.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Yang S, Su JZ, Gao Y, Yu GY. Clinicopathological study of involvement of the submandibular gland in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;58(2):203-207. - PubMed
    1. Spiegel JH, Brys AK, Bhakti A, Singer MI. Metastasis to the submandibular gland in head and neck carcinomas. Head Neck. 2004;26(12):1064-1068. - PubMed
    1. Jacob RF, Weber RS, King GE. Whole salivary flow rates following submandibular gland resection. Head Neck. 1996;18(3):242-247. - PubMed
    1. Shih H, Huang JS, Huang TT, et al. Gland-sparing neck dissection: oncological and functional outcomes in oral cancer patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023;52(8):825-830. - PubMed
    1. Yang S, Su JZ, Gao Y, Yu GY. Involvement of the submandibular gland in oral squamous cell carcinoma patients with positive lymph nodes. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;121(4):373-376. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources