DOI: 10.1200/jco.2026.44.19_suppl.237 ISSN: 0732-183X

Functional outcomes and quality of life after partial glossectomy for tongue carcinoma: A prospective observational study.

Gautam Anand, Pawan Gupta, Chirag Jain, Rashi Agrawal, Akhil Garg, Bhavya Mishra

237

Background: Tongue resection for carcinoma significantly impacts essential functions such as speech, swallowing, and tongue mobility. While various reconstruction techniques are available, their comparative impact on long-term function remains inadequately studied, especially within a standardized surgical framework. Methods: This prospective study included 42 patients with T1–T3 squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue who underwent Type II glossectomy at a tertiary cancer center. Patients were stratified into three reconstruction groups: primary closure, MatriDerm-assisted secondary intention healing, and flap reconstruction. Functional outcomes were assessed at 6–12 months postoperatively using validated instruments: EAT-10 for swallowing, Speech Handicap Index (SHI) for speech, Tongue Motility Assessment (TMA), and EORTC QLQ-F17 and HN35 for quality of life. Results: Swallowing outcomes were largely preserved, with a mean EAT-10 score of 3.05. MatriDerm group had the lowest swallowing difficulty, though differences between groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.079). SHI and TMA scores showed significant variation (p = 0.013 and p < 0.001, respectively), with flap reconstructions associated with worse outcomes. RAFF flaps performed better than bulkier options like ALT. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy were significantly associated with poorer function and QoL (p < 0.05). QoL scores were generally good, but subjective perceptions were lower in older patients. Tumor size, stage, and reconstruction type significantly influenced outcomes. Conclusions: MatriDerm and primary closure offered superior functional outcomes in partial glossectomy compared to flap reconstruction, particularly in T1–T2 tumors. The use of a standardized glossectomy classification (Ansarin et al.) enhanced methodological clarity. Future studies should explore long-term outcomes across broader populations and incorporate routine rehabilitative strategies. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2024/03/063482 .

Demography of the patient.

Clinical Details
Mean ± SD || Median (IQR) || Min-Max OR N (%)
Age (Years)
56.33 ± 12.00 || 57.50 (48.25-66.50) || 30.00 - 78.00
Surgery Type
 PG+ND + Flap Reconstruction
18 (42.9%)
 PG+ND + Primary Closure
16 (38.1%)
 PG+ND + Matriderm Placement
8 (19.0%)
Neck Dissection Type
 SOHND
25 (59.5%)
 MND
11 (26.2%)
 Ext-SOHND
6 (14.3%)
Flap Type Used
 RAFF Flap
5 (27.8%)
 ALT Flap
4 (22.2%)
 Infrahyoid Flap
4 (22.2%)
 Nasolabial Flap
2 (11.1%)
 FAMM Flap
1 (5.6%)
 MSAP flap
1 (5.6%)
 Submental Flap
1 (5.6%)
Post-Operative Hospital Stay (Days)
6.02 ± 2.90 || 5.00 (4.00-7.00) || 3.00 - 13.00
pT Stage
 T1
5 (11.9%)
 T2
19 (45.2%)
 T3
18 (42.9%)
pN Stage
 N0
19 (45.2%)
 N1
9 (21.4%)
 N2b
13 (31.0%)
 N3b
1 (2.4%)
Stage
 I
4 (9.5%)
 II
8 (19.0%)
 III
16 (38.1%)
 Iva
13 (31.0%)
 IVb
1 (2.4%)
Maximum Tumor Dimension (cm)
2.87 ± 1.23 || 2.80 (2.12-3.53) || 0.50 - 5.60
RT (Yes)
33 (78.6%)
CT (Yes)
6 (14.3%)

More from our Archive