Intraoperative Margin Assessment in Head and Neck Cancer: A Case of Misuse and Abuse?

Surgical removal with negative margins is the preferred management of oral squamous cell carcinomas. This review summarizes statements by professional organizations and data supporting the specimen-driven approach to margin assessment. Practical aspects of the intraoperative margin assessment, as guided by gross examination, are presented. The most cost- and time-efficient method of intraoperative margin assessment depends on desired margin clearance and likelihood of other adverse histologic factors, such as extranodal extension, perineural invasion, which are likelier in advanced carcinomas. Intraoperative surgeon-pathologist communication can be improved by reporting to surgical team gross distances to all or selected closest margins, before choosing margins for microscopic frozen examination. Case specific mitigation strategies to minimize the negative impact of tumor-bed driven margin assessment or of suboptimal margin revision are proposed. Based on size, shape, histology, size of carcinoma at the margin, and orientation of the additional tissue, margin revision may be judged as adequate (conversion of a positive margin into a negative one), inadequate (positive margin remains positive), or indeterminate. The significance of anatomic subsite based labeling, radial margin sampling from the main resection specimen, and the relationship between the distance to closest margin and local control are highlighted. The modern definition of safe margin would account for other parameters, such as perineural invasion. An updated approach to resolution of frozen versus permanent sampling issues is outlined. Future studies are needed to design and validate risk models that would help to determine for individual patient what represents a safe margin and how to judge the quality of margin revision.