Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33165732›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 Surgery2021

Results of pretreatment swallowing evaluation in patients with stage III/IV laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma.

Arun Balaji, Shivakumar Thiagarajan, Akshat Mallik, Nandini Menon, Adhara Chakraborthy, Devendra Chaukar

Abstract read
PubMed 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, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Arun BalajiDivision of Speech & Swallowing Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Shivakumar ThiagarajanDepartment of Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. drshiva78in@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1957-3338
Akshat MallikDepartment of ENT, Chairing Cross Hospital, London, UK.
Nandini MenonDepartment of Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Adhara ChakraborthyDepartment of Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Devendra ChaukarDepartment of Head & Neck Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Homi Bhabha National Institute · INCharing Cross Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLaryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma are among the common head and neck cancers causing considerable swallowing dysfunction. The functional status of the organ (larynx) is an important point of contention while considering the patients for organ preservation protocol. METHODOLOGY: The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the swallowing status in stage III/IV laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma and its influence on treatment decision. We evaluated all treatment naïve patients who were referred to the swallowing clinic in 2017 (Jan-Dec) for assessment of swallowing prior to treatment initiation.

resultsOne hundred patients satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. The site and stage of laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer cases were almost equal in number. Their median age was 58 years. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) was done in all patients. 30% of the patients only had swallowing difficulties. Only advanced T-stage (p = 0.04) had an influence on the pretreatment swallowing status. Thirty-seven patients required nasogastric tube (NGT) for feeding. By 2 month post-treatment completion, most patients on NGT could resume oral feeding.

conclusionsPretreatment swallowing assessment alone did not significantly seem to influence our decisions for organ preservation treatment. However, patients with aspiration could be identified and managed appropriately. Most patients on NGT could resume oral feeds post-treatment completion.

Indexed as

Deglutition DisordersHypopharyngeal NeoplasmsLarynxDeglutitionHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAssessmentDeglutitionFEESPretreatment swallowing

Identifiers

PMID33165732
OpenAlexW3103195712

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.