Primary study · included by 2 reviews

How does the close surgical margin impact recurrence and survival when treating oral squamous cell carcinoma?

Dillon 2015 · Dillon Jasjit K, Brown Christopher B, McDonald Tyler M, et al. · Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2015

Included by

Impact of surgical margins on recurrence and survival rate in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Non-Cochrane · prognostic · 2026 · cited as Dillon 2015 · Table 2; Figure 2a

Outcome this study informs	Pooled effect	Evidence	Certainty
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.312 [1.693, 3.158]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.657 [0.622, 0.694]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.751 [2.062, 3.669]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.658 [0.623, 0.695]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.654 [0.619, 0.691]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.696 [0.626, 0.773]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.657 [0.622, 0.694]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.657 [0.622, 0.694]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.878 [2.123, 3.901]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.656 [0.620, 0.693]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.702 [2.026, 3.605]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.640 [0.605, 0.677]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.998 [2.209, 4.068]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.658 [0.623, 0.695]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.634 [0.545, 0.738]	12 studies	Moderate
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.648 [1.970, 3.559]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival (5-year) Positive surgical margins (mostly <5 mm; study definitions varied) vs Negative surgical margins (mostly 5 mm or more; one study 10 mm or more)	RR 0.656 [0.621, 0.693]	12 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.958 [2.173, 4.026]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.647 [0.612, 0.685]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.700 [2.021, 3.608]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.724 [2.040, 3.636]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.719 [2.043, 3.619]	11 studies	Moderate
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.658 [0.623, 0.695]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Overall survival at 5 years Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · 5 years	RR 0.663 [0.628, 0.701]	11 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.718 [2.000, 3.695]	10 studies	GRADE not reported
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (mostly <5 mm; study definitions varied) vs Negative surgical margins (mostly 5 mm or more; one study 10 mm or more)	OR 2.690 [1.921, 3.767]	11 studies	Moderate
Local recurrence Positive surgical margins (<5 mm) vs Negative surgical margins (>=5 mm) · Follow-up 1 to 5 years across studies	OR 2.565 [1.868, 3.522]	10 studies	GRADE not reported

Prognostic value of surgical margin and margin to depth of invasion ratio in oral squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.

Non-Cochrane · prognostic · 2026 · cited as Dillon 2015 · Table 1; References

The review does not say which of its outcomes this study informs.

2 including reviews in total.