Thomas Pankau1,2, Gunnar Wichmann1, Thomas Neumuth3, Bernhard Preim4, Andreas Dietz1,3, Patrick Stumpp5, Andreas Boehm6. 1. Clinic of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Head Medicine and Oral Health, University Hospital of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 10-14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. 2. Department of Internal Medicine II, HELIOS Vogtland-Klinikum Plauen, Plauen, Germany. 3. Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery (ICCAS), Leipzig, Germany. 4. Department of Simulation and Graphics, Faculty of Computer Science, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany. 5. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 6. Clinic of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Head Medicine and Oral Health, University Hospital of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 10-14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. Andreas.Boehm@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Many treatment approaches are available for head and neck cancer (HNC), leading to challenges for a multidisciplinary medical team in matching each patient with an appropriate regimen. In this effort, primary diagnostics and its reliable documentation are indispensable. A three-dimensional (3D) documentation system was developed and tested to determine its influence on interpretation of these data, especially for TNM classification. METHODS: A total of 42 HNC patient data sets were available, including primary diagnostics such as panendoscopy, performed and evaluated by an experienced head and neck surgeon. In addition to the conventional panendoscopy form and report, a 3D representation was generated with the "Tumor Therapy Manager" (TTM) software. These cases were randomly re-evaluated by 11 experienced otolaryngologists from five hospitals, half with and half without the TTM data. The accuracy of tumor staging was assessed by pre-post comparison of the TNM classification. RESULTS: TNM staging showed no significant differences in tumor classification (T) with and without 3D from TTM. However, there was a significant decrease in standard deviation from 0.86 to 0.63 via TTM ([Formula: see text]). In nodal staging without TTM, the lymph nodes (N) were significantly underestimated with [Formula: see text] classes compared with [Formula: see text] with TTM ([Formula: see text]). Likewise, the standard deviation was reduced from 0.79 to 0.69 ([Formula: see text]). There was no influence of TTM results on the evaluation of distant metastases (M). CONCLUSION: TNM staging was more reproducible and nodal staging more accurate when 3D documentation of HNC primary data was available to experienced otolaryngologists. The more precise assessment of the tumor classification with TTM should provide improved decision-making concerning therapy, especially within the interdisciplinary tumor board.
PURPOSE: Many treatment approaches are available for head and neck cancer (HNC), leading to challenges for a multidisciplinary medical team in matching each patient with an appropriate regimen. In this effort, primary diagnostics and its reliable documentation are indispensable. A three-dimensional (3D) documentation system was developed and tested to determine its influence on interpretation of these data, especially for TNM classification. METHODS: A total of 42 HNC patient data sets were available, including primary diagnostics such as panendoscopy, performed and evaluated by an experienced head and neck surgeon. In addition to the conventional panendoscopy form and report, a 3D representation was generated with the "Tumor Therapy Manager" (TTM) software. These cases were randomly re-evaluated by 11 experienced otolaryngologists from five hospitals, half with and half without the TTM data. The accuracy of tumor staging was assessed by pre-post comparison of the TNM classification. RESULTS:TNM staging showed no significant differences in tumor classification (T) with and without 3D from TTM. However, there was a significant decrease in standard deviation from 0.86 to 0.63 via TTM ([Formula: see text]). In nodal staging without TTM, the lymph nodes (N) were significantly underestimated with [Formula: see text] classes compared with [Formula: see text] with TTM ([Formula: see text]). Likewise, the standard deviation was reduced from 0.79 to 0.69 ([Formula: see text]). There was no influence of TTM results on the evaluation of distant metastases (M). CONCLUSION:TNM staging was more reproducible and nodal staging more accurate when 3D documentation of HNC primary data was available to experienced otolaryngologists. The more precise assessment of the tumor classification with TTM should provide improved decision-making concerning therapy, especially within the interdisciplinary tumor board.
Entities:
Keywords:
Documentation; Head and neck cancer; Panendoscopy; Patient data; Reproducibility; TNM staging; Three-dimensional; Tumor Therapy Manager
Authors: Ricard Simo; Peter Morgan; Jean-Pierre Jeannon; Edward Odell; John Harrison; Bernice Almeida; Mark McGurk; Andrew Lyons; Karim Hussain; Michael Gleeson; Mary O'Connell; Frances Calman; Roy Ng; Paul Roblin; Steve Connor; Michael Fenlon; Mary Burke; Ashish Chandra; Amanda Herbert; Sarah Patt; Lizzie Steward-Bagley; Rachael Donnelly; Lesley Freeman; Claire Twinn; Carolyn Mason Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Stefan Mueller; Gunnar Wichmann; Lars Dornheim; Ivo Roessling; Julia Bertolini; Bernhard Preim; Andreas Dietz; Andreas Boehm Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2012-09-09 Impact factor: 1.872
Authors: A Boehm; F Lindner; G Wichmann; U Bauer; C Wittekind; M Knoedler; F Lordick; S Dietzsch; M Scholz; R Kortmann; A Dietz Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Andreas Dietz; Andreas Boehm; Christian Mozet; Gunnar Wichmann; Athanassios Giannis Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Nam P Nguyen; Paul Vos; Howard Lee; Thomas L Borok; Ulf Karlsson; Tomas Martinez; James Welsh; Deirdre Cohen; Russell Hamilton; Nga Nguyen; Ly M Nguyen; Vincent Vinh-Hung Journal: Oncology Date: 2008-10-08 Impact factor: 2.935