Literature DB >> 22991101

Sparing the larynx and esophageal inlet expedites feeding tube removal in patients with stage III-IV oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Neha Amin1, Krishna Reddy, David Westerly, David Raben, Peter DeWitt, Changhu Chen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the effect of larynx and esophageal inlet sparing on dysphagia recovery after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for stage III-IV oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective study.
METHODS: Of 88 patients treated with IMRT, 38 were planned with a larynx + esophageal inlet mean dose <50 Gy constraint, 27 with a larynx alone mean dose constraint of <50 Gy, and 23 without a larynx/esophagus constraint. All had a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placed before IMRT, which was removed when the patient could swallow and maintain weight. All IMRT plans were retrieved, and the larynx; esophageal inlet; and superior, middle, and inferior constrictors were contoured. Dosimetric data were correlated with PEG tube dependence duration.
RESULTS: The PEG tube was removed within 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after IMRT in 24%, 61%, 71%, and 83% of patients, respectively. Median times to PEG tube removal were 3.7 and 8.6 months (P = .0029) in patients planned with or without a larynx/larynx + esophageal inlet dose constraint. A mean dose to the larynx + esophageal inlet of ≤60 Gy reduced the median PEG tube duration from 10.8 to 6.1 months (P = .02), compared to >60 Gy. Mean pharyngeal constrictor doses in patients receiving a mean dose to the larynx + esophageal inlet of ≤50 Gy versus >50 Gy were: 60 Gy and 69 Gy, 55 Gy and 67 Gy, and 47 Gy and 57 Gy, for the superior, middle, and inferior constrictors, respectively (P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: A dose constraint on the larynx and esophageal inlet during IMRT planning reduces dose to pharyngeal constrictors and expedites PEG tube removal.
Copyright © 2012 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22991101     DOI: 10.1002/lary.23597

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  10 in total

1.  Validation of an updated evidence-based protocol for proactive gastrostomy tube insertion in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  T E Brown; V Getliffe; M D Banks; B G M Hughes; C Y Lin; L M Kenny; J D Bauer
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  Comparison of swallowing function after intensity-modulated radiation therapy and conventional radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Barbara Roa Pauloski; Alfred W Rademaker; Jerilyn A Logemann; Muveddet Discekici-Harris; Bharat B Mittal
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 3.147

Review 3.  Outcomes measurement in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Christine G Gourin
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 4.  The effect of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement on swallowing and swallow-related outcomes in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie M Shaw; Heather Flowers; Brian O'Sullivan; Andrew Hope; Louis W C Liu; Rosemary Martino
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 3.438

5.  New radiotherapy techniques do not reduce the need for nutrition intervention in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  T Brown; M Banks; B G M Hughes; C Lin; L M Kenny; J D Bauer
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  Exploring the Interplay Between Radiotherapy Dose and Physiological Changes in the Swallowing Mechanism in Patients Undergoing (Chemo)radiotherapy for Oropharynx Cancer.

Authors:  Alana R Hutchison; Laurelie R Wishart; Bena Brown; Elizabeth C Ward; Catriona Hargrave; Elizabeth Brown; Sandro Porceddu
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 3.438

7.  Estimation of daily interfractional larynx residual setup error after isocentric alignment for head and neck radiotherapy: quality assurance implications for target volume and organs-at-risk margination using daily CT on- rails imaging.

Authors:  Charles A Baron; Musaddiq J Awan; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Imad Akel; David I Rosenthal; G Brandon Gunn; Adam S Garden; Brandon A Dyer; Laurence Court; Parag R Sevak; Esengul Kocak-Uzel; Clifton D Fuller
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Dose to swallowing structures and dysphagia in head and neck Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy - A long term prospective analysis.

Authors:  Ram Abhinav Kannan; T R Arul Ponni
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2019-11-01

9.  Toxicity profile and early clinical outcome for advanced head and neck cancer patients treated with simultaneous integrated boost and volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Authors:  Ciro Franzese; Antonella Fogliata; Elena Clerici; Davide Franceschini; Elisa Villa; Giuseppe D'Agostino; Piera Navarria; Pietro Mancosu; Stefano Tomatis; Luca Cozzi; Marta Scorsetti
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Clinical and dosimetric risk stratification for patients at high-risk of feeding tube use during definitive IMRT for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  James E Jackson; Nigel J Anderson; Morikatsu Wada; Michal Schneider; Michael Poulsen; Maureen Rolfo; Maziar Fahandej; Hui Gan; Daryl Lim Joon; Vincent Khoo
Journal:  Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-02-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.