Pulmonary Screening Practices of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgeons Across Saudi Arabia in the Posttreatment Surveillance of Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Cross-sectional Survey Study

Post-treatment surveillance imaging in head and neck cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

In patients treated for head and neck cancer, imaging studies are usually obtained within 3-6 months after treatment for assessment of treatment response. After 6 months, most guidelines advocate clinical follow-up, with imaging reserved for patients with clinically suspect or equivocal findings. However, some guidelines do recommend systematic imaging surveillance, and many clinicians tend to include some type of imaging in their follow-up schemes.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review focuses on the usefulness of routine (systematic) post-treatment imaging surveillance of head and neck cancer beyond the first 3-6-month baseline imaging study.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. Additional studies were identified by reviewing reference lists. Only original studies and review papers were considered. Results obtained with systematic post-treatment surveillance imaging were compared to symptom-directed imaging and/or clinical finding-directed imaging.

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty-one records were identified through the database search, and 44 additional records were identified through other sources. Forty-eight articles were selected for the final review. Analysis of these records showed that almost half of cases of locoregional recurrences and/or metastases were only detected by imaging (40.9%), and the mean time of detection of recurrent or metastatic disease (11.5 months) was well beyond the period of the first post-treatment scan. Most authors reported superior results with PET-CT when compared to other imaging techniques.

CONCLUSION

Strong arguments were found in favor of systematic imaging surveillance in locoregional advanced head and neck cancer during at least one and preferably 2 years after treatment.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Analysis of the selected records showed that almost half of cases of locoregional recurrences and/or metastases were only detected by imaging. This systematic review suggests that imaging may currently be underused in the post-treatment surveillance of patients with head and neck cancer.

KEY POINTS

• This systematic review focuses on the usefulness of long-term systematic imaging surveillance in patients treated for head and neck cancer. • Analysis of 521 articles revealed that systematic imaging allowed the initial detection of locoregional recurrences and/or metastases in more than 40% of patients. • Imaging may currently be underused in the post-treatment surveillance of patients with advanced head and neck cancer.

Contemporary Imaging and Reporting Strategies for Head and Neck Cancer: MRI, FDG PET/MRI, NI-RADS, and Carcinoma of Unknown Primary-AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

CT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT play major roles in the diagnosis, staging, treatment planning, and surveillance of head and neck cancers. Nonetheless, an evolving understanding of head and neck cancer pathogenesis, advances in imaging techniques, changing treatment regimens, and a lack of standardized guidelines have led to areas of uncertainty in the imaging of head and neck cancer. This narrative review aims to address four issues in the contemporary imaging of head and neck cancer. The first issue relates to the standard and advanced sequences that should be included in MRI protocols for head and neck cancer imaging. The second issue relates to approaches to surveillance imaging after treatment of head and neck cancer, including the choice of imaging modality, the frequency of surveillance imaging, and the role of standardized reporting through the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System. The third issue relates to the role of imaging in the setting of neck carcinoma of unknown primary. The fourth issue relates to the role of simultaneous PET/MRI in head and neck cancer evaluation. The authors of this review provide consensus opinions for each issue.