Timing of neck dissection in association with transoral surgery: A systematic review

Latin American Consensus on the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is well known as a serious health problem worldwide, especially in low-income countries or those with limited resources, such as most countries in Latin America. International guidelines cannot always be applied to a population from a large region with specific conditions. This study established a Latin American guideline for care of patients with head and neck cancer and presented evidence of HNSCC management considering availability and oncologic benefit. A panel composed of 41 head and neck cancer experts systematically worked according to a modified Delphi process on (1) document compilation of evidence-based answers to different questions contextualized by resource availability and oncologic benefit regarding Latin America (region of limited resources and/or without access to all necessary health care system infrastructure), (2) revision of the answers and the classification of levels of evidence and degrees of recommendations of all recommendations, (3) validation of the consensus through two rounds of online surveys, and (4) manuscript composition. The consensus consists of 12 sections: Head and neck cancer staging, Histopathologic evaluation of head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-oral cavity, Clinical oncology-oral cavity, Head and neck surgery-oropharynx, Clinical oncology-oropharynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx, Head and neck surgery-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-larynx/hypopharynx, Clinical oncology-recurrent and metastatic head and neck cancer, Head and neck surgery-reconstruction and rehabilitation, and Radiation therapy. The present consensus established 48 recommendations on HNSCC patient care considering the availability of resources and focusing on oncologic benefit. These recommendations could also be used to formulate strategies in other regions like Latin America countries.

Neck Dissection Timing in Transoral Robotic or Laser Microsurgery in Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Objective

This review assesses the effect on intra- and postoperative patient outcomes of the timing of neck dissection in relation to transoral surgery. Outcome measures include postoperative bleeding, intra- and postoperative fistula formation, and disease-specific and overall survival.

Data Sources

A search was conducted across the MEDLINE, Embase, US National Library of Medicine, and Cochrane databases with search terms in July 2021.

Review Methods

Articles that conformed with specified inclusion criteria were included. Included articles were scanned for bias with the ROBINS-I tool.

Results

Nineteen articles were selected for qualitative analysis, including 546 patients who had neck dissection in conjunction with transoral robotic surgery/transoral laser microsurgery (TORS/TLM). Seventy-one (18%) patients had neck dissection prior to TORS/TLM, 39 (10%) had neck dissection performed after TORS/TLM, and 281 (72%) had concurrent procedures. In patients with neck dissection before TORS/TLM, 3% experienced major postoperative bleeding, and fistula rates were 0%. In the cohort with neck dissection after TORS/TLM, 3% experienced minor postoperative hemorrhage, and 8% had intraoperative fistulae. In the concurrent cohort of patients, 1% had major postoperative bleeds and 0.3% had minor bleeds, while 4% developed intraoperative fistulas and 0.3% developed postoperative fistulas.

Conclusion

Current evidence indicated that there appears to be no correlation between timing of neck dissection and complications. This systematic review found insufficient data to comment on whether the timing of neck dissection in relation to TORS/TLM affects the outcomes of patients.

Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Published in High-Impact Otolaryngology Journals

OBJECTIVE

To assess the methodological quality of intervention-focused systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) published in high-impact otolaryngology journals.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed for SR and MA citations from 2012 to 2017 in the 10 highest impact factor otolaryngology journals. Abstracts were screened to identify published manuscripts in which the authors indicated clearly that they were performing an SR or MA. Applying a modified typology of reviews, 4 reviewers characterized the review type as SR, MA, or another review type. A simplified version of the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2) tool was used to assess the reporting and methodological quality of the SRs and MAs that were focused on interventions.

RESULTS

Search and abstract screening generated 499 manuscripts that identified themselves as performing an SR or MA. A substantial number (85/499, 17%) were review types other than SRs or MAs, including 34 (7%) that were literature reviews. In total, 236 SRs and MAs focused on interventions. Over 50% of these SRs and MAs had weaknesses in at least 3 of the 16 items in the AMSTAR 2, and over 40% had weaknesses in at least 2 of the 7 critical domains. Ninety-nine percent of SRs and MAs provided critically low confidence in the results of the reviews.

CONCLUSION

Intervention-focused SRs and MAs published in high-impact otolaryngology journals have important methodological limitations that diminish confidence in the results of these reviews.

Transoral surgery (TOS) in oropharyngeal cancer: Different tools, a single mini-invasive philosophy

Surgery with or without adjuvant therapy and radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy have traditionally represented the possible treatment options for oropharyngeal cancer. The adverse effects of non-surgical treatments and recent technical innovations have prompted a new interest in the surgical approach. However, in parallel to the possibility of achieving radical cancer clearance, we should remember the impact that traditional open surgery has on the patient's cosmesis, functionality and quality of life. As a result, transoral surgery is an attractive option for oropharyngeal tumors. The term "transoral surgery" only indicates that the tumor is accessed and resected via the oral cavity, but the surgeon can choose among different resection methods, such as transoral laser microsurgery, transoral robotic surgery, transoral videolaryngoscopic surgery, endoscopic laryngo-pharyngeal surgery, and transoral ultrasound surgery. The aim of this paper is to review the recent literature on the transoral treatment of oropharyngeal cancer, to standardize the terminology of transoral procedures, analyzing the common aspects, main differences and future perspectives of the various forms of transoral surgery.