Literature DB >> 33880636

Functional and oncological outcomes of salvage transoral robotic surgery: a comparative study.

Pierre Gazda1,2, Clément Gauche3,4, Léonor Chaltiel5, Emilien Chabrillac3,4, Benjamin Vairel3,4, Guillaume De Bonnecaze4, Agnès Dupret-Bories3, Thomas Filleron5, Sébastien Vergez3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) as a first-line therapy has been well-documented but evidence is missing regarding salvage therapy. The aim of this study is to compare the oncological and functional outcomes of TORS as a primary and salvage therapy.
METHODS: This retrospective monocentric study included 74 patients operated by a single surgeon and sorted out into two groups: primary treatment (PT) or Salvage treatment (ST) in case of previous history of radiation therapy. Patients were further stratified by tumour location: larynx and pharynx (lST vs lPT and pST vs pPT).
RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included in PT group (64.9%) and 26 in ST group (35.1%). ST patients had more frequent cTis/T1 tumours (57.7% vs 29.2%, p = 0.0164) and no clinical lymph disease (3.8% vs 37.5%, p = 0.0016). Tracheostomy was more often performed in the ST group (57.7% vs 16.7%, p = 0.0003) and the lST subgroup (88.9% vs 9.1%, p < 0.0001). Gastric feeding tube placement was more frequent in the ST group (76.9% vs 33.3%, p = 0.0003), the pST subgroup (64.7% vs 15.4%, p = 0.0009) and the lST subgroup (100% vs 54.5%, p = 0.0297). We observed a trend for more postoperative complications in the ST group (69.2% vs 47.9%, p = 0.0783). The overall survival was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0004), and in the pST subgroup (p < 0.0001). The disease-free survival rate was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0001), the pST subgroup (p = 0.0002) and the lST subgroup (p = 0.0328).
CONCLUSION: This study confirms that survival and functional outcomes after salvage TORS are worse than in first line surgery.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Head and neck cancer; Salvage treatment; Swallowing disorders; Tracheostomy; Transoral robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33880636     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-06812-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  25 in total

1.  Oncological and functional outcomes of trans-oral robotic surgery for pyriform sinus carcinoma: A French GETTEC group study.

Authors:  Paul Mazerolle; Pierre Philouze; Renaud Garrel; Karine Aubry; Sylvain Morinière; Sophie El Bedoui; Jean Ton Van; Christophe Ferron; Olivier Malard; Franck Jegoux; Emilie Berard; Sébastien Vergez
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 5.337

2.  Initial multi-institutional experience with transoral robotic surgery.

Authors:  Sebastien Vergez; Benjamin Lallemant; Philippe Ceruse; Sylvain Moriniere; Karine Aubry; Erwan De Mones; Adil Benlyazid; Yann Mallet
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 3.497

3.  Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic laryngectomy in a canine model.

Authors:  Gregory S Weinstein; Bert W O'malley; Neil G Hockstein
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Bleeding Complications After Transoral Robotic Surgery: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Authors:  William Stokes; Jad Ramadan; Georges Lawson; F Robert L Ferris; Floyd Christopher Holsinger; Meghan T Turner
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal carcinoma: Surgical margins and oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Eric J Moore; Kathryn M Van Abel; Daniel L Price; Christine M Lohse; Kerry D Olsen; Ryan S Jackson; Eliot J Martin
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 3.147

6.  Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) for base of tongue neoplasms.

Authors:  Bert W O'Malley; Gregory S Weinstein; Wendy Snyder; Neil G Hockstein
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Clinical outcomes of transoral robotic surgery for supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma: experience of a french evaluation cooperative subgroup of gettec.

Authors:  V Razafindranaly; B Lallemant; K Aubry; S Moriniere; S Vergez; E De Mones; O Malard; Ph Ceruse
Journal:  B-ENT       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 0.082

8.  Transoral robotic surgery: a multicenter study to assess feasibility, safety, and surgical margins.

Authors:  Gregory S Weinstein; Bert W O'Malley; J Scott Magnuson; William R Carroll; Kerry D Olsen; Lixia Daio; Eric J Moore; F Christopher Holsinger
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 3.325

9.  Assessment of intraoperative safety in transoral robotic surgery.

Authors:  Neil G Hockstein; Bert W O'Malley; Gregory S Weinstein
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 10.  Robotic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous prostate surgery and radiotherapy.

Authors:  Omer Acar; Tarık Esen
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2014-07-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.