Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31982945›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2020

Surgical rescue for persistent head and neck cancer after first-line treatment.

Teresa Bernadette Steinbichler, L Golm, D Dejaco, D Riedl, B Kofler, C Url, D Wolfram, H Riechelmann

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Blood pressure instability in head and neck cancer survivors.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Teresa Bernadette SteinbichlerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. teresa.steinbichler@i-med.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2666-226X
L GolmDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
D DejacoDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
D RiedlDepartment of Medical Psychology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
B KoflerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
C UrlDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
D WolframDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
H RiechelmannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Innsbruck Medical University · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSurgical rescue is a treatment option for persistent disease after first-line treatment treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC).

methodsPatients with persistent HNC treated with rescue surgery between 2008 and 2016 were included. Patients who received a rescue neck dissection (ND only) and who received primary site surgery ± ND were analysed separately (primary site surgery ± ND).

resultsDuring the observation period, 35 patients received ND only and 17 primary site surgery ± ND. No perioperative mortality was observed. In nine patients with ND only and 12 patients with primary site surgery ± ND at least one complication was encountered. 41/52 (79%) patients had a complete response. Median overall survival of patients receiving rescue surgery was 56 months (95% CI 44-69 months). Median overall survival was best for patients with initial laryngeal and oropharyngeal cancer and worst for patients with hypopharyngeal cancer (p = 0.02). Functional deficits following rescue surgery were mainly observed in the domains speech, nutrition, and shoulder/arm mobility. The risk of functional impairment was higher for patients with rescue surgery at the primary tumor site (OR 2.5 ± 2; p = 0.07).

conclusionRescue surgery offers patients with resectable, persistent disease a realistic chance to achieve long-term survival. Especially patients with laryngeal and oropharyngeal cancer profited from rescue surgery. Rescue neck dissection is an effective and safe procedure. Patients with rescue surgery at the primary tumor site ± ND should expect complications and permanent functional impairment.

Indexed as

Head and Neck NeoplasmsHypopharyngeal NeoplasmsLaryngeal NeoplasmsOropharyngeal NeoplasmsHumansLaryngectomyNeck DissectionRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapyClavien–Dindo scorePectoralis major flapSalvage laryngectomySalvage surgeryVAC therapy

Identifiers

PMID31982945
PMCPMC7160075
OpenAlexW3001560420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.