Shoulder Function After Level IIB Neck Dissection: A Randomized Controlled Study (2B/Not 2B)
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00765791|
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified December 2013 by Peter Dziegielewski, University of Alberta.
Recruitment status was: Enrolling by invitation
First Posted : October 3, 2008
Last Update Posted : December 18, 2013
Many types of head and neck cancers will have local spread to the neck. As such selective neck dissection is performed as part of the treatment. The neck is divided into various levels. Selective neck dissection targets areas that are most likely to harbor cancer cells for specific types of head and neck cancers. Level IIB has been particularly controversial in the last few years, as the rate of cancer spread to this area has been shown to be quite low (0-8%). Moreover, because the spinal accessory nerve (involved in shoulder function) runs through this area, there is theoretical risk of causing post-operative shoulder weakness. As such, the question of whether removing level IIB, knowing that there is low chance of it containing disease spread, is worth risking decreased shoulder function. Some would argue that all potential diseased sites should be removed at all costs. While other advocate that a balance between disease cure and function should be maintained. However, what needs to be determined is just what impact does dissecting IIB have on shoulder function. At our institution, the rate of poor shoulder function associated with selective neck dissection has been perceived as being quite low. This study is designed to test this observation.
Hypothesis: Neck dissection including level IIb in head and neck cancer patients will not lead to worse shoulder function and quality of life than when level IIb is preserved.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma||Procedure: Selective Neck Dissection Including Level IIB Procedure: Selective Neck Dissection Excluding Level IIB||Early Phase 1|
Hide Detailed Description
The lymphatic fluid of upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) drains into various levels of the neck. When cancer occurs in the UADT, the potential for local metastatic spread to the neck exists, thus necessitating treatment of the neck. Ideally all potential neck structures, which could harbor cancer cells or provide a dock for recurrence, would be eradicated. Unfortunately, such radical treatments have shown to cause extreme rates of morbidity with little extra oncologic benefit. Thus, head and neck oncologists have strived to create treatment paradigms, which maximize cure rates while minimizing morbidity. Finding this intricate balance has translated to selective neck dissection (SND) and post-operative RT.1
Increased understanding of lymphatic drainage patterns in the head and neck has lead to widespread use of SND. Through removal of lymphatics in neck levels with the highest risk of harboring cancer cells, based on primary tumor site, important neck structures may be preserved. As such, the treatment remains oncologically sound and avoids the morbidity associated with its predecessor, the radical neck dissection. 1
One of the structures preserved in the SND is the spinal accessory nerve (SAN), which is responsible for providing motor innervation to the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) and trapezius muscles. Thus, it is intricately involved in shoulder function. The nerve exists the skull base at the jugular foramen and obliquely passes through neck level II. It then passes posterior to the SCM and eventually enters the trapezius muscles. Through this trajectory, it divides level II into IIa (anterior to the SAN) and IIb (posterior to the SAN).
It is known that shoulder function significantly deteriorates when level V is dissected.2 This is likely due to traction and devascularization injury of the longest portion of the SAN in the neck. As such, practice has become such that level V is left intact in cases where it does not harbor detectable disease or when occult disease incidence is very low. Due to the intimate relationship of IIb with the SAN, there is also potential for injury to the nerve in this area.2 As such, debate has arisen to the necessity of including IIb in the neck dissection specimen. Studies have shown that the prevalence of occult nodal disease in IIb ranges from 0-8.7.5% depending on the overall n stage of the neck.3-5 These figures have lead head and neck surgeons to weigh the benefits of not excising lymphatic tissue with low nodal metastatic rates versus excising the area and decreasing post-operative shoulder function.6
Because the incidence of occult metastases in IIb is low3-5, it has become standard of care in many centers to spare IIb, if it is oncologically feasible, in SND to preserve shoulder function. Because these patients receive post-operative RT it is thought that the RT will address any occult disease. Unfortunately, relying on RT poses two problems:
- occult disease may not respond to the RT
- leaving level IIb intact provides a lymphatic route of recurrence despite undergoing RT By surgically removing all portals of lymphatic disease spread these issues above can be eliminated.
The goal of this study is to demonstrate that the minimal manipulation of the SAN associated with IIb dissection will not have a significant impact on post-operative shoulder function. If this is the case, the standard of practice should be changed to include IIb in the SND specimen in cases where level IIa is dissected as well. This would eliminate any further lymphatic tissue, which may harbor disease.
Note: At the University of Alberta, some head and neck surgeons prefer to spare IIb in SND, while others prefer to resect it. Thus, the protocol in this study does not manipulate current standards of practice.
*Reference numbers correspond to articles in the "Citations" section. The citations are in order of appearance in the above text.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||32 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||Shoulder Function After Level IIB Neck Dissection: A Randomized Controlled|
|Study Start Date :||December 2008|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||February 2014|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||February 2014|
Active Comparator: 1
Level IIB is dissected
Procedure: Selective Neck Dissection Including Level IIB
Level IIB is dissected
Active Comparator: 2
Level IIB is not dissected
Procedure: Selective Neck Dissection Excluding Level IIB
Level IIB is not dissected
- Change in Neck Dissection Impairment Index (NDII) score from pre- to post-op. [ Time Frame: 6 months per patient ]
- Shoulder strength, range of motion and electromyographic (EMG)/nerve conduction testing [ Time Frame: 6 months per patients ]
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00765791
|University of Alberta Hospital|
|Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G2B7|
|Principal Investigator:||Hadi R Seikaly, MD, FRCSC||University of Alberta|