Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To update the guidelines for neck dissection terminology, as previously recommended by the American Head and Neck Society. PARTICIPANTS: Committee for Neck Dissection Classification, American Head and Neck Society; representation from the Committee for Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (T.A.D.). EVIDENCE: Review of current literature on neck dissection classification. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Semiannual face-to-face meetings of the Committee for Neck Dissection Terminology and e-mail correspondence. CONCLUSIONS: Standardization of terminology for neck dissection is important for communication among clinicians and researchers. New recommendations have been made regarding the following: boundaries between levels I and II and between levels III/IV and VI; terminology of the superior mediastinal nodes; and the method of submitting surgical specimens for pathologic analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robbins et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: