Cell carcinoma of the paranasal sinuses and skull base

McKay, Shawn P.; Shibuya, Terry Y.; Armstrong, William B.; Wong, Hausin; Panossian, Apraham M.; Ager, Joel W.; Mathog, Robert H.

doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2006.09.007

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With open surgical approaches and adjuvant therapy, sinonasal SCC have a 5-year OS ranging from 43% to 59% (Table 4). 4,5,[15][16][17][18] Despite a similar surgical paradigm over the past several decades, there have been improvements in the OS associated with these tumors, likely because of improvements in surgical technique and adjuvant therapy. Very few reports exist regarding endoscopic resection of sinonasal SCC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology

Almeida

Koutourousiou

et al. 2014

Head & Neck

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology

Almeida

Koutourousiou

et al. 2014

Head & Neck

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reported risk factors for poor survival outcome are increased age 7 ; histology (malignant melanoma, 5,8 undifferentiated carcinoma, [9][10][11] and squamous cell carcinoma 12 ); tumor extension to the sphenoid sinus, 13 pterygopalatine fossa, 6 orbit, 6,13 dura, 5,6,8,10,14,15 or brain 13 ; UICC staging: T4, 6,14,16,17 M1, 6 and N1 6,11,16 ; positive surgical margin 5,8,14 ; and incomplete removal. 18 The present risk factors for survival outcome were consistent with these reports.…”

Section: Risk Factors For Poor Survival Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

Craniofacial Resection for Sinonasal Malignant Tumors: Statistical Analysis of Surgical Outcome over 17 Years at a Single Institution

Mine

Saeki²,

Horiguchi³

et al. 2011

Skull Base

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a retrospective analysis of surgical outcome of sinonasal malignant tumors. Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), local control (LC), and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated in 32 patients. Prognostic factors for survival and functional outcomes were investigated. The median follow-up period was 70 months. At 5 years, OS, DSS, LC, and DFS rates were 0.722, 0.745, 0.851, and 0.707, respectively. Prognostic factors for poor OS were involvement of the frontal sinus (p = 0.023), T classification (T4, p = 0.025), surgical complications (p = 0.029), chemotherapy (p = 0.035) postsurgical infection (p = 0.043), involvement of the orbit (p = 0.048), histology (squamous cell carcinoma, p = 0.049), and radiotherapy (p = 0.043). Prognostic factors for poor DSS were radiotherapy (p = 0.030), chemotherapy (p = 0.036), positive surgical margin (p = 0.034), and T classification (T4, p = 0.050). LC was adversely influenced by surgical procedure (combined frontotemporal resection, p = 0.035) and positive surgical margin (p = 0.049). DFS was adversely influenced by positive surgical margin (p = 0.001). Prognostic factors for poor functional outcome were postsurgical infection (p = 0.039), postsurgical complications (p = 0.040), tumor location (maxillary sinus, p = 0.042, orbit, p = 0.0002), number of sinuses involved (number of sinuses involved was inversely proportional to functional outcome, p = 0.027), T classification (T4 p = 0.007), pathology (squamous cell carcinoma, p = 0.023), and chemotherapy (p = 0.048). Craniofacial resection was an effective surgical option.

show abstract

“…In addition to whether an open or endoscopic approach is indicated, the role of radiotherapy in managing ONB is debated, 16,18 as proximity to the eyes and frontal lobes can result in blindness 17 and frontal lobe necrosis. 19 While none of the ONB patients in this study experienced neuropathy from radiation treatment, more work is needed to determine the risks associated with high-dose radiotherapy in this region of the skull base as well as potential therapeutic effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In their multi-institutional review of 30 patients with squamous cell carcinoma, McKay et al reported a low 3-year survival rate of 32% after craniofacial resection, although this may have been due to the high proportion of T4b lesions in the study. 19 Of the eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma included in this study, all are alive at the present and living without evidence of disease.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Advanced Endoscopic Resection of Diverse Skull Base Malignancies: Technological Analysis during an 8-Year Single Institutional Experience

Rutland

Goldrich

Loewenstern

et al. 2020

J Neurol Surg B Skull Base

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Resection of skull base malignancies poses complex pathological and treatment-related morbidities. Recent technological advancements of endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) offer the ability to reexamine traditional treatment paradigms with endoscopic procedures. The utility of EES was quantitatively examined in a longitudinal series with attention to morbidities and postoperative outcomes. Methods A single-center retrospective review was performed of all malignant sinonasal tumors from 2010 to 2018. Patients with purely EES were selected for analysis. Disease features, resection extent, complications, adjuvant treatment, recurrence, and survivability were assessed. Despite the mixed pathological cohort, analysis was performed to identify technical aspects of resection. Results A total of 68 patients (47.6% males and 52.4% females, average age: 60.3 years) were included. A diversity of histotypes included clival chordoma (22.1%), olfactory neuroblastoma (14.7%), squamous cell carcinoma (11.8%), and adenoid cystic carcinoma (11.8%). Gross total resection (GTR) was achieved in 83.8% of cases. Infection (4.4%) and cerebrospinal fluid leak (1.5%) were the most common postoperative complications. Total 46 patients (67.6%) underwent adjuvant treatment. The average time between surgery and initiation of adjunctive surgery was 55.7 days. Conclusion In our 8-year experience, we found that entirely endoscopic resection of mixed pathology of malignant skull base tumors is oncologically feasible and can be accomplished with high GTR rates. There may be a role for EES to reduce operative morbidity and attenuate time in between surgery and adjuvant treatment, which can be augmented through recent mixed reality platforms. Future studies are required to systematically compare the outcomes with those of open surgical approaches.

show abstract

Cell carcinoma of the paranasal sinuses and skull base

Cited by 17 publications

References 17 publications

Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology

Endonasal endoscopic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the sinonasal cavities and skull base: Oncologic outcomes based on treatment strategy and tumor etiology

Craniofacial Resection for Sinonasal Malignant Tumors: Statistical Analysis of Surgical Outcome over 17 Years at a Single Institution

The Role of Advanced Endoscopic Resection of Diverse Skull Base Malignancies: Technological Analysis during an 8-Year Single Institutional Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About