Predictors of hospital expenses and hospital stay among patients undergoing total laryngectomy: Cost effectiveness analysis

Tracheostomy care of non-ventilated patients and COVID considerations: A scoping review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to examine and evaluate the existing clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements regarding tracheostomy care for non-mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases, and professional organisations was conducted from inception to 19 March 2023. Two appraisers evaluated each guideline using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Text and Opinion Papers.

RESULTS

No specific clinical guidelines exist on airway management in non-mechanically ventilated patients. Of 6318 articles identified, we included 12 clinical practice guidelines, and 9 consensus statements, which were from China, the US, the UK, South Korea, Australia, France and Belgium. The AGREE II scores in six domains are (1) the scope and purpose, 70.30%; (2) stakeholder involvement, 37.61%; (3) rigor of development, 33.97%; (4) clarity of presentation, 68.16%; (5) applicability, 44.23% and (6) editorial independence, 40.06%. The overall quality of evidence was level B. The summarised recommendations for clinical practice encompass the following six areas: airway humidification, management of the trach cuff, management of inner cannula, tracheostoma care, tracheostomy suctioning and management and prevention of common post-operative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall quality of the clinical guidelines on non-ventilated tracheostomy care was moderate, and further improvements are needed in domains of stakeholder involvement, applicability, clarity of presentation and editorial independence. Recommendations on non-ventilated tracheostomy care are often embedded in the guidelines on ventilated tracheostomy. Specific clinical guidelines are needed to provide a standardised approach to tracheostomy care for non-ventilated patients.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Patients with non-ventilated tracheostomy need specialised airway management. Improving patient outcomes requires standardised protocols, patient involvement, quality evaluation, and interdisciplinary approaches.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The study reviewed clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements, therefore patient or public input was not needed.

The prognostic utility of preoperative geriatric nutritional risk index on survival outcomes of locally advanced oral cancer

PURPOSE

This retrospective cohort study was to assess the prognostic value of preoperative geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) on survival outcomes for patients with locally advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma (LAOSCC).

METHODS

Patients with LAOSCC receiving upfront radical surgery at a single institute from January 2007 to February 2017 were enrolled. The primary outcomes in the study were 5-year overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates, and a nomogram based on GNRI and other clinical-pathological factors was established for individualized OS prediction.

RESULTS

There were 343 patients enrolled in this study. The optimal cut-off value of GNRI was observed to be 97.8. Patients in the high-GNRI group (GNRI ≥97.8) had statistically significantly better outcomes in 5-year OS (74.7% vs. 57.2%, p = 0.001) and CSS (82.2% vs. 68.9%, p = 0.005) when compared with the low-GNRI group (GNRI <97.8). In Cox models, low GNRI remained an independent negative prognosticator of OS (HR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.124-2.277; p = 0.009) and CSS (HR: 1.907; 95% CI: 1.219-2.984; p = 0.005). The c-index of the proposed nomogram, incorporating assorted clinicopathological factors and GNRI, had a statistically significant increase compared with the predictive nomogram constructed by the TNM staging system alone (0.692 vs. 0.637, p < 0.001)."

CONCLUSION

Preoperative GNRI is an independent prognostic factor of OS and CSS in patients with LAOSCC. A multivariate nomogram that includes GNRI may better help us to accurately estimate individual survival outcomes.

Prognostic utility of neutrophil-to-albumin ratio in surgically treated oral squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of preoperative neutrophil-to-albumin ratio (NAR) in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC).

METHODS

A total of 622 patients with surgically treated OSCC were enrolled. NAR was defined as the absolute neutrophil count divided by the serum albumin level in peripheral blood before the radical surgery. Cox proportional hazards model were used to discover survival outcome-associated factors.

RESULTS

The optimal cut-off of NAR to predict overall survival (OS) was determined to be 0.1. In Cox model, high NAR was identified as an independent negative prognosticator of OS, cancer-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.503, 1.958, and 1.727, respectively; all p < 0.05). The NAR-based nomogram accurately predicted OS (concordance index: 0.750).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that preoperative NAR is a convenient and effective prognostic marker for OSCC and NAR-based nomogram can be a promising prognostic tool in clinical setting.

The Prognostic Value of Preoperative Albumin-to-Alkaline Phosphatase Ratio on Survival Outcome for Patients With Locally Advanced Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Background: This retrospective cohort study was to assess the prognostic value of preoperative albumin-to-alkaline phosphatase ratio (AAPR) on survival outcome for patients with locally advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma (LAOSCC). Methods: A total of 250 patients with LAOSCC receiving upfront radical surgery at a single institute from January 2008 to December 2017 were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the survival predictability of preoperative AAPR on the 5-year overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Cox proportional hazards model was used for survival analysis. The X-tile software was used to estimate the optimal cut-off value of preoperative AAPR on survival prediction. A predictive nomogram incorporating the clinicopathological factors on OS was further generated. Results: The 5-year OS, CSS, and DFS rates were 68.6%, 79.7%, and 61.7%, respectively. The optimal cut-off of preoperative AAPR to predict the 5-year OS was observed to be 0.51. For those with preoperative AAPR≧0.51, the 5-year OS, CSS, and DFS were statistically significantly superior to those with preoperative AAPR<0.51 (OS: 76.1% vs 48.5%, P < .001; CSS: 84.3% vs 66.4%, P = .005; DFS: 68.9% vs 42.6%, P < .001). In Cox model, we observed that preoperative AAPR<0.51 was a significantly negative prognosticator of OS (HR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.466-3.361, P < .001), CSS (HR: 2.037, 95% CI: 1.16-3.578, P  = .013), and DFS (HR: 1.756, 95% CI: 1.075-2.868, P  = .025). After adding the variable of preoperative AAPR, the c-index of the predictive nomogram incorporating assorted clinicopathological factors increases from 0.663 to 0.692 for OS. Conclusion: Our results suggest that preoperative AAPR serves as an independent survival predictor for patients with LAOSCC. The nomogram incorporating preoperative AAPR and various clinicopathological features may be a convenient tool to estimate the mortality risk for patients with LAOSCC.