Facial plating industry payments: An analysis of the open payments database

Objective

To compare industry payments from facial plating companies to plastic surgery, oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS), and otolaryngology (OHNS).

Methods

The Open Payments Database was queried from 2016 to 2021 to identify all industry disbursements related to facial plating products from Stryker, Zimmer Biomet, Depuy Synthes Products, Acumed, and KLS Martin. Total dollars, number of payments, and specialists paid were compared between plastic surgery, OMFS, and OHNS. Funding was correlated to estimated case volume and number of licensed surgeons determined by literature review.

Results

From 2016 through 2021, OMFS received an average of $786,497 annually, followed by plastic surgery ($765,482), and OHNS ($184,484). On average, facial plating companies distributed 2256, 963, and 917 yearly payments to 699 oral and maxillofacial surgeons, 378 plastic surgeons, and 354 otolaryngologists, respectively. Total dollars, number of payments, and specialists paid were significantly different between specialties (p < .05). Facial trauma coverage is 39.6% by plastic surgery, 36.6% by OMFS, and 23.3% by OHNS. There are 7560 licensed oral and maxillofacial surgeons, 4948 plastic surgeons, and 11,778 otolaryngologists in the United States. Decreased payment to OHNS was more than could be accounted for by case volume alone.

Conclusions

The facial plating industry allocates more funding dollars to OMFS and plastic surgery compared to OHNS. OMFS receives the greatest number of payments to the most specialists compared to plastic surgery and OHNS. Engagement between OHNS and the facial plating industry is a potential area of growth in the future.Level of evidence: Level 4.

Biologics and acellular dermal matrices in head and neck reconstruction: A comprehensive review

Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have been studied extensively in the literature and have gained popularity for various reconstructive and aesthetic purposes. ADMs are composed of a basement membrane and acellular dermal layer of collagen and provide a platform for mucosal epithelization and neovascularization. Combining dermal collagen and essential growth factors allows ADMs to support adequate wound healing and bolster soft-tissue repairs. These dermal matrices can be derived from human cadaveric donor skin (allogenic) or mammalian donor sources (xenogeneic). These dermal substitutes provide the benefit of reducing or eliminating the need for autologous tissue grafts and subsequently minimize donor site morbidity. Many ADMs are currently available in the market, each with variations in processing, manufacturing, storage, preparation, and use. The literature validating ADMs in the head and neck for both cosmetic and reconstructive purposes is evolving rapidly. This review aims to provide an up-to-date and comprehensive overview of the principles of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs), the different types of ADMs, and evaluate common indications, techniques, and outcomes pertaining to select anatomic sites in the head and neck reconstruction.

Head and Neck Melanoma Incidence Trends in the Pediatric, Adolescent, and Young Adult Population of the United States and Canada, 1995-2014

Importance

Melanoma is one of the most common cancers worldwide, typically diagnosed in older adults. There is an increasing incidence in the younger population (age ≤40 years) in America. In addition, approximately 1 in 5 cases of melanoma affect the head and neck. However, there are limited data on the incidence of head and neck melanoma in the pediatric, adolescent, and young adult population in North America (United States and Canada).

Objective

To assess 20-year demographic and incidence changes associated with head and neck melanoma in the pediatric, adolescent, and young adult population in North America.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A descriptive analysis of retrospective data on head and neck melanoma from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America public use data set from 1995 to 2014 was conducted. The data set currently includes 93% of the United States and 64% of the Canadian populations. Eligible data were from 12 462 pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients (aged 0-39 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of melanoma (International Classification of Diseases-Oncology 3 histologic types 8720-8790) in primary head and neck sites: skin of lip, not otherwise specified (C44.0); eyelid (C44.1); external ear (C44.2); skin of other/unspecified parts of face (C44.3); and skin of scalp and neck (C44.4). The study was conducted from January 26 to July 21, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Log-linear regression was used to estimate annual percentage change in age-adjusted incidence rates (AAIRs) of head and neck melanoma.

Results

Of the 12 462 patients with head and neck melanoma included in the study, 6810 were male (54.6%). The AAIR was 0.51 per 100 000 persons (95% CI, 0.50-0.52 per 100 000 persons). In North America, the incidence of head and neck melanoma increased by 51.1% from 1995 to 2014. The rate was higher in the United States (AAIR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.51-0.53 per 100 000 person-years) than Canada (AAIR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.40-0.45 per 100 000 persons). In the United States, the incidence increased 4.68% yearly from 1995 to 2000 and 1.15% yearly from 2000 to 2014. In Canada, the incidence increased 2.18% yearly from 1995 to 2014. Male sex (AAIR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.54-0.57 per 100 000 persons), older age (AAIR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.79-0.80 per 100 000 persons), and non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity (AAIR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.80 per 100 000 persons) were associated with an increased incidence of head and neck melanoma.

Conclusions and Relevance

The incidence of pediatric, adolescent, and young adult head and neck melanoma in North America appears to have increased by 51.1% in the past 2 decades, with males aged 15 to 39 years the main cohort associated with the increase.

Treatment for lymphedema following head and neck cancer therapy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To perform the first systematic review evaluating all established treatment modalities of head and neck lymphedema resulting from head and neck cancer therapy. Since craniofacial lymphedema treatment represents unique challenges not addressed by extremity lymphedema therapies, a systematic review and evaluation of treatment modalities specific to this area is needed to guide clinical management and further research.

DATA SOURCES

Four electronic databases were searches from inception to September 2018. These included Scopus (Embase), PubMed (Medline), Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Databases.

REVIEW METHODS

A search string was developed, and all databases queried for keywords on three subjects: head and neck cancer, lymphedema, and therapy. Results were uploaded to an EndNote database where relevant items were identified by hand-searching all titles and abstracts. Subsequently results were combined, duplicates removed, and full papers screened according to eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

Of a total 492 search results, twenty-six items met eligibility criteria for this review. These included fourteen cohort studies, seven case reports, two randomized controlled trials, two systematic reviews, and one narrative review totaling 1018 study subjects. The manual lymph drainage group had the largest number of studies and participants, with fewer studies investigating selenium, liposuction, and lymphaticovenular anastomosis.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for the efficacy of all types of lymphedema therapy is limited by paucity of large randomized controlled trials. While manual lymph drainage is best studied, liposuction and surgical treatments have also been effective in a small number of patients.

The utility of the harmonic scalpel in selective neck dissection: a prospective, randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of the harmonic scalpel on intraoperative blood loss and operative time in selective neck dissection (SND) (levels I-IV) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

A single, tertiary care institution (Foothills Medical Centre) in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

SUBJECTS

A total of 31 patients (36 neck dissections) were prospectively enrolled between January 2009 and March 2010.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive a neck dissection with either the harmonic scalpel or the traditional technique of using electrocautery and sharp dissection. The study included adult patients older than age 18 years diagnosed with HNSCC and who required an SND (levels I-IV). Study exclusion criteria included previous treatment for head and neck cancer and all patients unwilling or unable to provide informed consent. Primary clinical outcomes were intraoperative blood loss and operative time. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative complications and surgical drain output.

RESULTS

Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the harmonic scalpel group compared to the traditional group (158 vs 61 mL, P = .02). There was no difference in operative time (81 minutes harmonic vs 85 minutes traditional) or total drain output (at both 48 hours and 1 week) between the groups. There were no intraoperative complications reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study suggest that the harmonic scalpel can reduce blood loss during SND for HNSCC. The harmonic scalpel had no impact on operative time, postoperative drain output, or complication rate.

Training, practice, and referral patterns in rhinologic surgery: survey of otolaryngologists

OBJECTIVES

Rhinology, which encompasses clinical and surgical treatment of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses, is a growing subspecialty with advances in the surgical, clinical, and research realms. The advancement of this subspecialty and its impact on the practice of otolaryngology, in both academic and nonacademic institutions, is not yet understood.

METHODS

A novel survey created by our research team was mailed out to 150 randomly selected otolaryngology staff and 8 fellowship-trained rhinologists throughout Canada asking questions related to demographics, training, referral patterns, technique, and adequacy of training.

RESULTS

One hundred respondents completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 63%. The average age of rhinologists who responded (38 years) was younger than those who were nonrhinologists (50 years). Compared with fellowship-trained rhinologists, nonrhinologists felt less comfortable with cerebrospinal leak repairs, skull base surgery, frontal sinus surgery, paranasal sinus neoplasm removal, and sphenopalatine artery ligation.

CONCLUSIONS

Rhinology is a distinct subspecialty with new fellowship opportunities combined with advances in surgical technique, clinical treatments, and research opportunities. There are procedures that can be performed by both rhinologists and nonrhinologists; however, there is a subset of procedures that nonrhinologists do not feel comfortable performing. These procedures should be referred to fellowship-trained rhinologists who practice out of academic centres.

Evaluation of meta-analyses in the otolaryngological literature

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of meta-analyses written on otolaryngological topics and define areas that can be improved upon in future studies.

DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE databases were searched. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews was excluded, because these meta-analyses have already been critically evaluated and found to be of high quality.

REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review of otolaryngological meta-analyses published between 1997 and 2006 (10 years) was performed in duplicate and independently by two authors. The search included 16 common otolaryngological terms. Inclusion criteria were meta-analytic methodology, otolaryngological topic, and at least one author from a department of otolaryngology. Fifty-one articles fulfilled eligibility criteria. In duplicate and independently, two reviewers assessed the quality of eligible metaanalyses using a validated 10-item index called the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire. Using the methods of Spearman, correlation coefficients are reported for associations examined between covariates and the Overall Score Quality.

RESULTS: The majority of studies had methodologic flaws (mean score 3.9, scale of 1-7). Variables predicting higher-quality meta-analyses were publication in journals with higher impact factors ( P = 0.0007) and authors who previously published metaanalyses ( P = 0.0001). Using and reporting about a validity assessment tool needs to be improved upon in future studies.

CONCLUSION: The quality of meta-analyses on otolaryngological topics is moderate. Future meta-analyses can be improved upon by following evidence-based guidelines for the reporting of metaanalyses, which include the use of a validity assessment tool, and consulting with an author familiar with meta-analysis methodology.