| Literature DB >> 22084765 |
Guillaume Buiret1, Clémentine Daveau, Guillaume Landry, Carole Colin, Jean-Christian Pignat, Marc Poupart.
Abstract
Objective. To analyze the functional impact of the various possible treatments of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas to find the main prognostic factors of dysphagia induced by these treatments. Patients. Clinical data from 254 patients treated for squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx between 1998 and 2003 were retrospectively analyzed. A multivariate model enabled us to evaluate the role of each potentially harmful factor on swallowing. Main Outcome Measures. The significant factors influencing the consumption of liquid, pasty, and normal food were the same: the initial T stage and the type of treatment. Conclusion. Whatever the possible and selected treatment was, the impact on the functional capacities, and thus, the quality of life of the patients was considerable. Even though we could not significantly demonstrate exclusive radiotherapy caused more long-term undesirable effects than surgery followed by radiotherapy, our daily practice has shown that we should favour the latter.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22084765 PMCID: PMC3200131 DOI: 10.5402/2011/609517
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Surg ISSN: 2090-5785
Characteristics of the patients.
| Characteristics of the patients | |
|---|---|
| Age: mean (SD), yr | 57.8 (10.9) |
| Sex: no (%) | |
| Male | 223 (88.5) |
| Female | 29 (11.5) |
| ASA stage at diagnosis: no (%) | |
| I | 62 (24.6) |
| II | 117 (46.4) |
| III | 72 (28.6) |
| IV | 1 (0.4) |
| BMI at diagnosis: mean (SD), kg/m² | 22.7 (4.2) |
| Previous ENT cancer: no (%) | 62 (24.6) |
| Relapse: no (%) | 32 (12.7) |
| AJCC stage groups: no (%) | |
| I | 14 (5.5) |
| II | 28 (11.1) |
| III | 43 (17.1) |
| IV | 167 (66.3) |
| UICC T stage groups: no (%) | |
| T1 | 25 (9.9) |
| T2 | 81 (32.1) |
| T3 | 75 (29.8) |
| T4 | 71 (28.2) |
| UICC N stage groups: no (%) | |
| N0 | 105 (41.7) |
| N1 | 14 (5.5) |
| N2a | 25 (9.9) |
| N2b | 45 (17.9) |
| N2c | 38 (15.1) |
| N3 | 25 (9.9) |
| UICC M stage groups: no (%) | |
| M0 | 247 (98.0) |
| M1 | 5 (2.0) |
ASA: American Society of Anaesthesiology, BMI: Body mass index, AJCC: American Joint Committee on Cancer, and UICC: International Union against Cancer.
Types of treatment.
| Types of treatment | |
|---|---|
|
| 81 (32.1) |
|
| 158 (62.7, |
| Submandibular approach | 65 (25.8, |
| Hyosubglossoepiglottectomy | 32 (12.7, |
| Lateral oropharyngectomy | 28 (11.1, |
| Total laryngectomy extended in base of tongue | 5 (2.0, |
| Transoral approach | 58 (23.0, |
| Transmandibular approach | 31 (12.3, |
| Mandibular swing | 26 (10.3, |
| Pharyngectomy with mandibulectomy | 5 (2.0, |
| Lymphadenectomy only | 4 (1.6, |
|
| 157 (62.3, |
| Left | 42 (16.7, |
| Right | 48 (19.0, |
| Bilateral | 67 (26.6, |
|
| 41 (16.3, |
|
| 173 (68.7) |
| Postoperative radiotherapy | 112 (44.4) |
| With concomitant chemotherapy | 46 (18.1) |
| Without concomitant chemotherapy | 66 (26.3) |
| Exclusive radiotherapy | 46 (18.1) |
| With concomitant chemotherapy | 32 (12.7) |
| Without concomitant chemotherapy | 14 (5.4) |
| Local curietherapy | 15 (6.0) |
|
| 38 (15.1, |
|
| 6 (2.4) |
|
| 9 (3.6) |
Doses of radiation by type of treatment.
| 0 Gy | [20 Gy; 50 Gy]* | [50 Gy; 60 Gy] | [60 Gy; 70 Gy] | ≥70 Gy | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Submandibular approach | ||||||
| Hyosubglossoepiglottectomy | 6 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 7 | 32 |
| Lateral oropharyngectomy | 2 | 2 | 6 | 17 | 0 | 28 |
| Transoral approach | 13 | 2 | 8 | 20 | 8 | 51 |
| Transmandibular approach | ||||||
| Pharyngectomy with mandibulectomy | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Mandibular swing | 3 | 0 | 4 | 18 | 1 | 26 |
| Exclusive radiotherapy | 0 | 0 | 4** | 23 | 19 | 46 |
*[20 Gy; 50 Gy] means the patient received 20 Gy or more but less than 50 Gy. Every patient who received less than 50 Gy had previously undergone radiotherapy, and this dose was a complementary dose.
**indicates patients who stopped radiotherapy prematurely because of intolerance.
Figure 1Swallowing evolution by type of treatments. Pts: patients. All pharyngectomy with mandibulectomy were performed on patients with recurrent tumours previously irradiated (salvage surgery).
Figure 2Evolution of nasogastric tube use by type of treatment.
Statistical study of swallowing.
| Factors | Liquid feeding | Paste feeding | Normal feeding | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR |
| HR |
| HR |
| |
|
| ||||||
| Sex | 1.044 | .950 | 1.407 | .8875 | 1.306 | .6892 |
|
|
| 0.978 | .7913 | 0.985 | .8415 | |
| ASA | .5703 | .3855 | .6020 | |||
| ASA II | 1.191 | 1.201 | 1.104 | |||
| ASA III | 0.957 | 1.376 | 0.854 | |||
| Location | .1087 | .5515 | .2292 | |||
| Lateral oropharyngeal wall | 3.653 | 3.166 | 3.187 | |||
| Tonsil | 4.280 | 3.224 | 2.163 | |||
| Tongue base | 4.120 | 3.411 | 2.312 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
| .2945 |
|
| |||
| T2 | 0.590 | 0.68 | 0.565 | |||
| T3 | 0.69 | 0.803 | 0.371 | |||
| T4 | 0.569 | 0.474 | 0.309 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
|
| .0998 | .1647 | |||
| N1 | 0.809 | 0.822 | 0.812 | |||
| N2a | 0.41 | 0.769 | 0.890 | |||
| N2b | 0.2986 | 1.145 | 1.375 | |||
| N2c | 0.587 | 0.493 | 0.512 | |||
| N3 | 0.537 | 0.475 | 0.534 | |||
| History of cancer | .690 | .4348 | .0817 | |||
|
| ||||||
|
| 0.451 |
| 0.547 |
| 0.544 | .057 |
|
|
| .0542 |
| |||
| Hyosubglossoepiglottectomy | 0.335 | 1.244 | 0.290 | |||
| Lateral oropharyngectomy | 1.209 | 2.490 | 1.243 | |||
| Exclusive radiotherapy | 1.227 | 2.988 | 1.017 | |||
| Transoral approach | 2.44 | 4.982 | 1.094 | |||
| Mandibular swing | 2.943 | 3.093 | 1.130 | |||
| Reconstructio | .3362 | .1374 | .0743 | |||
| Pectoralis major flap | 0.882 | 1.562 | 2.017 | |||
| Sternocleidomastoid flap | 3.395 | 3.896 | 2.873 | |||
| Postoperative complication | 1.259 | .3623 | 1.457 | .2031 | 2.028 |
|
| Radiation dose on T | 1.012 | .7913 | 1.018 | .1417 | 1.013 | .2453 |
| Radiation dose on N | 0.986 | .119 | 0.981 |
| 0.996 | .5902 |