Reducing Trismus After Surgery and Radiotherapy in Oral Cancer Patients: Results of Alternative Operation Versus Traditional Operation

Rehabilitation strategies for trismus post oral cancer treatment: Progress in the study of mouth opening exercises

Oral cancer is a significant public health issue worldwide. Although its treatment methods effectively control tumor growth, they can lead to complications, including Trismus, severely affecting patients' quality of life. The practice standards for mouth opening exercises, a rehabilitative method to prevent and treat Trismus, are not yet clear. Therefore, this article aims to review the research progress of mouth opening exercises in the rehabilitation of Trismus post oral cancer treatment, providing a scientific and effective rehabilitation plan for oral cancer patients to improve their quality of life.

Quality of Life: determinant of success of head and neck cancer therapy in the battle of survival vs. rehabilitation

BACKGOUND

Surgical treatment for cancers in the oral and maxillofacial region significantly impacts a patient's physical, social, functional, and psychological well-being, which can in-turn affect the Quality of Life (QoL) negatively. The goal of our study was to assess the Quality of Life (QoL) of patients who underwent surgery in our hospital, and we attempted to extrapolate the data which could in the future help improve the QoL of other patients who undergo similar treatments.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, including patients who have been treated for oral cancer in the last few years in the institute. The standard EORTC Questionnaires QLQ C-30 (version 3.0) and QLQ H and N-35 (version 1.0) were used in this study.

RESULTS

GHS scores were lower in patients with T3 stage tumor than in patients with T1 stage tumor. Patients who underwent surgery along with radiotherapy and those who underwent surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy showed a substantial difference in their GHS and FS ratings when their treatment options were compared. Patients who had undergone surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy had higher scores on the symptom scale and QoL H&N-35 than patients who had just undergone surgery and radiotherapy There was no statistically significant difference in the scores, pertaining to the location, age, gender and stage of the tumor but when the comparison was made on the basis of treatment modality chosen, there was a significant difference in the scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of any treatment is to improve the Quality of Life. The EORTC questionnaires QLQ 30 and QLQ H and N-35 proved to be very appropriate instruments to evaluate QoL in patients with oral cancer. Assessment of QoL should always receive adequate attention in treatment planning and rehabilitation. Choice of treatment modality plays a significant role in QoL of patients treated for oral cancer. Henceforth, any treatment modality should be selected not only with a curative intent but also with the goal of improving the Quality of Life as this ultimately decides the success of the therapy from the patient's perspective.

Patterns of Postoperative Trismus Following Mandibulectomy and Fibula Free Flap Reconstruction

The factors that contribute to postoperative trismus after mandibulectomy and fibula free flap reconstruction (FFFR) are undefined. We retrospectively assessed postoperative trismus (defined as a maximum interincisal opening ≤35 mm) in 106 patients undergoing mandibulectomy with FFFR, employing logistic regression to identify risk factors associated with this sequela. The surgical indication was primary ablation in 64%, salvage for recurrence in 24%, and osteonecrosis in 12%. Forty-five percent of patients had existing preoperative trismus, and 58% of patients received adjuvant radiation/chemoradiation following surgery. The overall rates of postoperative trismus were 76% in the early postoperative period (≤3 months after surgery) and 67% in the late postoperative period (>6 months after surgery). Late postoperative trismus occurred more frequently in patients with ramus-involving vs. ramus-preserving posterior mandibulotomies (82% vs. 46%, p = 0.004). A ramus-involving mandibulotomy was the only variable significantly associated with trismus >6 months postoperatively on multivariable logistic regression (OR, 7.94; 95% CI, 1.85−33.97; p = 0.005). This work demonstrates that trismus is common after mandibulectomy and FFFR, and suggests that posterior mandibulotomies that involve or remove the ramus may predispose to a higher risk of persistent postoperative trismus.

The Effectiveness of Surgical Methods for Trismus Release at Least 6 Months After Head and Neck Cancer Treatment: Systematic Review

Background

The objective of this systematic review was to identify the different surgical treatment modalities of severe trismus after head and neck squamous cell cancer treatment.

Methods

An electronic literature database search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and OpenGrey to determine articles published up to September 2021. Two observers independently assessed the identified papers for eligibility according to PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were trismus after head and neck squamous cell cancer with consecutive treatment, detailed description of the surgical procedure for trismus release, description of the initial treatment, at least 6 months between initial cancer treatment and trismus release surgery, a minimal follow-up (FU) of 6 months, and availability of full text. The quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A subanalysis of the maximal mouth opening (MMO) was performed using a mixed-effect model.

Results

A total of 8,607 unique articles were screened for eligibility, 69 full texts were reviewed, and 3 studies, with a total of 46 cases, were selected based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Three treatment strategies were identified for trismus release (1) free flap reconstruction (FFR), (2) coronoidectomy (CN), and (3) myotomy (MT). There was a clear improvement for all treatment modalities. A quantitative analysis showed a beneficial effect of CN (mean 24.02 ± 15.02 mm) in comparison with FFR (mean 19.88 ± 13.97 mm) and MT (mean 18.38 ± 13.22 mm) (P < 0.01^*). An increased gain in MMO after trismus release was found if no primary resection was performed (P = 0.014^*). Two studies included in the analysis had an intermediate risk of bias and one had a low risk of bias.

Conclusion

Currently available reports suggest a low threshold for performing a CN compared with FFR and MT. There is a need for high-quality randomized controlled trials with carefully selected and standardized outcome measures.

Restricted Mouth Opening in Head and Neck Cancer: Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment

Restricted mouth opening or trismus is often encountered in patients with head and neck cancer. The restriction may be the presenting sign of malignancy, a sequela of tumor site or growth, an adverse effect of oncologic treatment, or a first sign of tumoral recurrence. In general, any insult to the temporomandibular joint, masticatory muscles, or their neural innervation may cause limitation in mouth opening. The etiologies leading to trismus are as follows: myospasm secondary to tumor infiltration; reflectory myospasm; radiation-induced myositis and myofibrosis; temporomandibular joint involvement with tumor; unfavorable postsurgical scarring; muscle and joint atrophy secondary to immobilization; pain; jaw fracture and hardware failure; and infection. Preventive measures should be implemented before, during, and after treatment. These measures include identification of high-risk patients, utilization of dose-sculpting radiation techniques whenever possible, performing reconstruction at the same time of resective surgery whenever feasible, and initiating mobilization exercises as early as possible. When trismus develops, treatments are often challenging and disappointing. These include physical therapy, mouth opening appliances, drug therapy, and release surgery. All medical specialties dealing with head and neck cancer should be familiar with the diagnosis and prevention of trismus and make an effort to ensure patients are referred to the appropriate care when needed. Trismus should not be considered a trivial sequela of head and neck cancer.

Role of Prophylactic Coronoidectomy in Oral Cancer Treatment: a Retrospective Cohort Study

To evaluate the effectiveness of coronoidectomy to prevent trismus in patients undergoing primary surgery for oral cancer. Patients who underwent primary surgery for oral gingivo-buccal cancers were analysed. Group 1 (G1) consists of patients who underwent coronoidectomy during the primary ablative procedure and group 2 (G2) who underwent standard ablative surgery without coronoidectomy. Post-treatment maximum interincisor opening was compared between the two groups. Sixty-four patients were included, 31 in G1 and 33 patients in G2. Overall, 81% had reduction in mouth opening at the time of evaluation. The post-treatment mean mouth opening was 28.81 ± 8.2 and 22.30 ± 10.9 (p = .01) in G1 and G2, respectively. Amongst factors predisposing to trismus, patients with oral submucous fibrosis (p = .008) had reconstruction with microvascular free flap (p = .007), without post-operative radiotherapy (p = .01) and good patient compliance (p = .003) had significant benefit with simultaneous coronoidectomy. In the sub-group analysis in patients without OSMF and PORT, the mean reduction in mouth opening was significantly better in G1 (p = .04). Prophylactic coronoidectomy done at the time of primary surgery showed significant reduction in post-surgical trismus.

Guidelines for the Surgical Management of Oral Cancer: Korean Society of Thyroid-Head and Neck Surgery

Korean Society of Thyroid-Head and Neck Surgery appointed a Task Force to provide guidance on the implementation of a surgical treatment of oral cancer. MEDLINE databases were searched for articles on subjects related to “surgical management of oral cancer” published in English. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. The quality of evidence was rated with use RoBANS (Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies) and AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews). Evidence-based recommendations for practice were ranked according to the American College of Physicians grading system. Additional directives are provided as expert opinions and Delphi questionnaire when insufficient evidence existed. The Committee developed 68 evidence-based recommendations in 34 categories intended to assist clinicians and patients and counselors, and health policy-makers. Proper surgical treatment selection for oral cancer, which is directed by patient- and subsite-specific factors, remains the greatest predictor of successful treatment outcomes. These guidelines are intended for use in conjunction with the individual patient’s treatment goals.