Functional outcomes and survival of patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer after total glossectomy

Quinsan, Isabela de Cássia Marins; Costa, Gustavo Carvalho; Priante, Antonio Vitor Martins; Cardoso, Cesar Augusto; Nunes, Caio Lúcio Soubhia

doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2019.02.005

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The statistical heterogeneity was high at I 2 = 70%. Meta-analysis of 1331 patients from 28 evaluable studies 8,9,20,23,28,30,33-36,38-40,42,47,48,50,53-55,57,58,61,64,74,85 showed a pooled risk of OCF of 8.55% (95% CI, 5.71%-11.4%, I 2 = 71.8%) among patients undergoing free flap reconstruction (Figure 3A), compared to 8.02% (95% CI, 5.27%-10.8%, I 2 = 72.7%) among 1449 patients undergoing regional flap reconstruction from 34 evaluable studies 10,13,14,16,19,21,24-26,32,41,44,45,51,56,59,60,62,63,65-67,69,71,73,75,76,78,80,82-84 (Figure 3B). Pooled risk of fistula was 6.74% (95% CI, 4.50%-8.97%, I 2 = 38.6) among 1133 patients undergoing segm...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Pooled risk of fistula was 6.74% (95% CI, 4.50%-8.97%, I 2 = 38.6) among 1133 patients undergoing segmental mandibulectomy in 21 studies, 13,16,20,22,23,28,33,35,39,40,42,47,48,50,51,53,54,57,69,75,77 compared to 5.48% (95% CI, 2.41%-8.45%, I 2 = 54.6%) among 556 patients without segmental mandibulectomy in 24 studies. 10,12,30,31,34,38,41,[43][44][45]52,[54][55][56]59,65,67,68,71,73,74,78,80,82 A total of 591 patients from 12 studies 9,17,18,20,23,…”

Section: Meta-analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Orocutaneous Fistula After Oral Cavity Resection and Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tassone

Galloway

Dooley

et al. 2021

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Orocutaneous fistula (OCF) after reconstruction for oral cavity resection can lead to prolonged hospitalization and adjuvant treatment delay. Few studies have examined factors leading to OCF after oral cavity resection. Primary objective: evaluate overall incidence and factors associated with OCF after oral cavity reconstruction. Data Sources: Scopus 1960—database was searched for terms: “orocutaneous fistula,” “oro cutaneous fistula,” “oral cutaneous fistula,” “orocervical fistula,” “oral cavity salivary fistula.” Review Methods: English language studies with >5 patients undergoing reconstruction after oral cavity cancer resection were included. About 1057 records initially screened; 214 full texts assessed; 78 full-texts included. PRISMA guidelines were followed, and MINORS criteria used to assess risk of bias. Data were pooled using random-effects model. Primary outcome was OCF incidence. Meta-analysis to determine the effect of preoperative radiation on OCF conducted on 12 eligible studies. Pre-collection hypothesis was that prior radiation therapy is associated with increased OCF incidence. Post-collection analyses: free versus pedicled flaps; mandible-sparing versus segmental mandibulectomy. Results: Seventy-eight studies were included in meta-analysis of overall OCF incidence. Pooled effect size showed overall incidence of OCF to be 7.71% (95% CI, 6.28%-9.13%) among 5400 patients. Meta-analysis of preoperative radiation therapy on OCF showed a pooled odds ratio of 1.68 (95% CI, 0.93-3.06). OCF incidence was similar between patients undergoing free versus pedicled reconstruction, or segmental mandibulectomy versus mandible-sparing resection. Conclusion: Orocutaneous fistula after oral cavity resection has significant incidence and clinical impact. Risk of OCF persists despite advances in reconstructive options; there is a trend toward higher risk after prior radiation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Meta-analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Orocutaneous Fistula After Oral Cavity Resection and Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tassone

Galloway

Dooley

et al. 2021

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only studies including oncological outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence-free survival) for patients affected by oral cavity carcinoma (OCC) treated with post-operative chemoradiotherapy who showed the presence of minor risk factors were analyzed. Criteria for exclusion are reported in the Supplementary Materials Table S2 [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ,…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adding Concomitant Chemotherapy to Postoperative Radiotherapy in Oral Cavity Carcinoma with Minor Risk Factors: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

Rito¹,

Fiorica

Carbonara

et al. 2022

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When presenting with major pathological risk factors, adjuvant radio-chemotherapy for oral cavity cancers (OCC) is recommended, but the addition of chemotherapy to radiotherapy (POCRT) when only minor pathological risk factors are present is controversial. A systematic review following the PICO-PRISMA methodology (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42021267498) was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries. Studies assessing outcomes of POCRT in patients with solely minor risk factors (perineural invasion or lymph vascular invasion; pN1 single; DOI ≥ 5 mm; close margin < 2–5 mm; node-positive level IV or V; pT3 or pT4; multiple lymph nodes without ENE) were evaluated. A meta-analysis technique with a single-arm study was performed. Radiotherapy was combined with chemotherapy in all studies. One study only included patients treated with POCRT. In the other 12 studies, patients were treated with only PORT (12,883 patients) and with POCRT (10,663 patients). Among the patients treated with POCRT, the pooled 3 year OS rate was 72.9% (95%CI: 65.5–79.2%); the pooled 3 year DFS was 70.9% (95%CI: 48.8–86.2%); and the pooled LRFS was 69.8% (95%CI: 46.1–86.1%). Results are in favor of POCRT in terms of OS but not significant for DFS and LRFS, probably due to the heterogeneity of the included studies and a combination of different prognostic factors.

show abstract

“…O terceiro estudo 14 teve como objetivo avaliar o perfil clínico-epidemiológico, as complicações pós-operatórias, as taxas de sobrevida e os aspectos funcionais de pacientes com câncer da cavidade oral e da orofaringe submetidos à glossectomia total. Foram recrutados (n=22) pacientes do sexo masculino, todos portadores de câncer de cavidade oral e orofaringe.…”

Section: Análise Dos Dadosunclassified

Fatores associados à indicação de via alternativa de alimentação após câncer de língua

Custódio,

Gonçalves,

Haas

et al. 2024

Distúrb Comun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introdução: O câncer de cavidade oral constitui lesões da superfície da mucosa oral, e, devido às sequelas da doença e de seu tratamento, frequentemente ocorrem quadros de disfagia. Quando a alimentação por via oral se torna impossibilitada, é fundamental a indicação de vias alternativas de alimentação. Objetivo: verificar a ocorrência e os fatores associados ao uso de via alternativa de alimentação após câncer de língua. Método: A busca foi conduzida por dois pesquisadores independentes nas bases de dados Medline (Pubmed), LILACS, SciELO, Scopus, WEB OF SCIENCE e BIREME sem restrição de idioma e localização, no período de 2010 a 2021. Para complementar e evitar viés de risco foi realizada uma busca por literatura cinza no Google Scholar. Critérios de Seleção: A revisão sistemática foi conduzida conforme as recomendações do Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Foram incluídos na pesquisa estudos que obtiveram pontuação ≥ a 6 pontos segundo o protocolo para pontuação qualitativa proposto por Pithon. Resultados: Os estudos mostram que a maioria dos indivíduos com câncer oral desenvolvem uma perda significativa de peso, necessitando de intervenção. O estágio geral da doença é um preditor significativo de perda de peso crítica em pacientes em tratamento. Conclusão: A indicação de via alternativa de alimentação após câncer de língua foi de 19,3% a 68,2%, e os fatores associados a essa indicação de VAA foram o estágio geral, cirurgia associada à terapia adjuvante, má adesão ao tratamento multidisciplinar, presença de complicações e baixa sobrevida.

show abstract

Functional outcomes and survival of patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer after total glossectomy

Cited by 10 publications

References 22 publications

Orocutaneous Fistula After Oral Cavity Resection and Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Orocutaneous Fistula After Oral Cavity Resection and Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Adding Concomitant Chemotherapy to Postoperative Radiotherapy in Oral Cavity Carcinoma with Minor Risk Factors: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

Fatores associados à indicação de via alternativa de alimentação após câncer de língua

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About