Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32607829›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2021

Routine panendoscopy in oral squamous cell cancer patients: mandatory or facultative?

Anthony Valentin, Martin Goetz, Juergen Hetzel, Siegmar Reinert, Sebastian Hoefert

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Panendoscopy for Head and Neck Cancers: Detection of Synchronous Second Primary Cancers, Complications and Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Systematic Review.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anthony ValentinDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Osianderstr. 2-8, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Martin GoetzDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital of Sindelfingen-Boeblingen, Bunsenstr. 120, 71032, Boeblingen, Germany.
Juergen HetzelDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Pneumology, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Otfried-Mueller-Str. 10, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Siegmar ReinertDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Osianderstr. 2-8, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Sebastian HoefertDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Osianderstr. 2-8, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. sebastian.hoefert@med.uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0017-4575
University of Tübingen · DEKlinikum Sindelfingen-Böblingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study investigated benefits of routine panendoscopy in staging of oral squamous cell cancer patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsFrom 2013 to 2017, 194 oral squamous cell cancer patients were staged. Reports of routine flexible panendoscopy including oropharyngolaryngoscopy, bronchoscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy were retrospectively analyzed for diagnoses of inflammation and second primary malignancies (carcinoma in situ or cancer) and compared to results of computed tomography. The effects of alcohol and tobacco history of 142 patients were assessed.

resultsOverall, a second primary malignancy was detected in seven patients. In four patients this discovery was only found by panendoscopy. One invasive carcinoma (esophagus) was detected as well as three carcinoma in situ. The second primary malignancies were located in the lung (3), esophagus (3), and stomach (1). In one patient index tumor therapy was modified after panendoscopy. Upper gastrointestinal inflammation was present in 73.2% of patients and 61.9% required treatment. About 91.8% of bronchoscopies and 34.5% of panendoscopies were without therapeutic consequences. Patients with higher risk from smoking were more likely to benefit from panendoscopy and to have a Helicobacter pylori infection.

conclusionWe do not recommend routine panendoscopy for all oral squamous cell cancer patients. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy benefitted smoking patients primarily concerning the secondary diagnosis of inflammation of the upper digestive tract. Selective bronchoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and oropharyngolaryngoscopy should be performed if clinical examination or medical history indicates risks for additional malignancies of the upper aerodigestive tract. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Routine panendoscopy is not recommended in all, especially not in low-risk oral cancer patients like non-smokers and non-drinkers.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Squamous CellHead and Neck NeoplasmsHelicobacter InfectionsHelicobacter pyloriMouth NeoplasmsNeoplasms, Multiple PrimaryEndoscopyHumansNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesGastrointestinal inflammationNational guidelinesOral cancerRoutine panendoscopySynchronous second primary cancer

Identifiers

PMID32607829
PMCPMC7878265
OpenAlexW3038902757

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.