Review of olfactory cleft roof anatomy

Progress in skull-base endoscopic surgery has improved our knowledge of olfactory cleft (OC) anatomy. This article presents a review of current knowledge concerning the OC roof: descriptive anatomy, radiological exploration, and endoscopic observation. The OC is a narrow area in the most superior part of the nasal cavity. Its roof is the thinnest structure separating the nasal cavities from the brain; it comprises three superimposed tissues: nasal mucosa, ethmoid cribriform plate (ECP), and dura mater. The ECP comprises the anterior ECP containing the ethmoidal slit (ES) medially and the cribroethmoidal foramen (CEF) laterally; and the posterior ECP, comprising the olfactory foramina. The OC roof is bordered anteriorly by the nasal bone roof, laterally by the lateral ethmoid masses, and posteriorly by the jugum and anterior wall of the sphenoid sinuses. Imaging is crucial for analyzing this wall, providing precise detailed information on conformation and anatomic relations with adjacent structures such as the anterior ethmoidal artery. Understanding OC roof anatomy and correct interpretation of imaging are essential for safety in present-day functional endoscopic sinus surgery and anterior skull-base oncologic surgery.

Histosurgical mapping of endoscopic endonasal surgery of sinonasal tumours to improve radiotherapy guidance

PURPOSE

Endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) is becoming a standard for most malignant sinonasal tumours. Margin analysis after piecemeal resection is complex and optimally relies on accurate histosurgical mapping. Postoperative radiotherapy may be adapted based on margin assessment mapping to reduce the dose to some sinonasal subvolumes. We assessed the use of histosurgical mapping by radiation oncologists (RO).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A French practice survey was performed across 29 ENT expert RO (2 did not answer) regarding integration of information on EES, as well as quality of operative and pathology reportsto refine radiotherapy planning after EES. This was assessed through an electronic questionnaire.

RESULTS

EES was ubiquitously performed in France. Operative and pathology reports yielded accurate description of EES samples according to 66.7% of interviewed RO. Accuracy of margin assessment was however insufficient according to more than 40.0% of RO. Additional margins/biopsies of the operative bed were available in 55.2% (16/29) of the centres. In the absence of additional margins, quality of resection after EES was considered as microscopically incomplete in 48.3% or dubious in 48.3% of RO. As performed, histosurgical mapping allowed radiotherapy dose and volumes adaptation according to 26.3% of RO only.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized histosurgical mapping with margin and additional margin analysis could be more systematic. Advantages of accurate EES reporting could be dose painting radiotherapy to further decrease morbidity in sinonasal tumours.

Postoperative radiotherapy after flap reconstructive surgery in patients with head and neck cancer: A retrospective monocentric study with flap delineation to assess toxicity and relapse

PURPOSE

Flaps are increasingly used during reconstructive surgery of head and neck cancers to improve functional outcomes. There are no guidelines as to whether the whole flap or its anastomotic border should be included in the primary tumour target volume of postoperative radiotherapy to prevent local relapses. Relapse and toxicity rates can increase substantially if the whole flap received full dose. Our aim was to determine whether flaps were included in the primary tumour target volume and to report the patterns of relapse and toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients in 2014 through 2016, with or without a flap, receiving postoperative radiotherapy were selected in a retrospective monocentric control study. Flaps were homogenously delineated blind to treating radiation oncologists using a flap-specific atlas. Tumour recurrence, acute and late toxicity were evaluated using univariate and propensity score analyses.

RESULTS

A hundred patients were included; 54 with a flap. Median flap volume included in the tumour volume was 80.9%. Twelve patients experienced local recurrences: six with a flap, among whom two within their flap (3.7%). Patients with flaps had larger median tumour volumes to be irradiated (25cm³ versus 58cm³, p<0.001) and higher acute/late toxicity rates (p<0.001) even after adjustment on biases (more advanced T stage, oral cavity, active smoking in patients with flaps). Locoregional recurrence and survival rates were similar between patients with/without a flap.

CONCLUSION

Recurrences within a flap were rare in this series when including the whole flap body in the 60Gy-clinical target volume but inclusion of the flap in the primary tumour target volume increased toxicity. Multicentric studies are warranted.