ArticleTherapeutic advances in allergy and rhinology
Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Surgical Treatment of Nasal and Ethmoidal Malignancies: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in allergy and rhinology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) has gained widespread acceptance as a surgical approach for treating sinonasal malignancies in the last decade. Objectives: This study examined the validity of the EEA as a standard modality for the surgical treatment of sinonasal malignancies. Design: A retrospective multicenter cohort study. Methods: This study included patients with nasoethmoidal malignancies who underwent initial surgical treatment between 2014 and 2016 at 10 tertiary referral hospitals in Japan. The EEA, craniofacial approach (CA), and EEA combined with CA (EEAwCA) were used as the surgical methods. Results: The total number of participants was 110, with a median posttreatment observation period of 69 months. The olfactory cleft (26%) was the most frequent lesion site. Squamous cell carcinoma (29%) and olfactory neuroblastoma (24%) were the most frequently observed pathological classifications. EEA was performed in early-stage cases, and EEAwCA, which is frequently used for tumors that extend into the orbit and/or intracranial regions, was performed in advanced-stage cases. Negative-margin resection was achieved in 85%, 78%, and 64% of EEA, EEAwCA, and CA cases, respectively; postoperative radiotherapy was performed in 50%, 56%, and 36% of patients with EEA, EEAwCA, and CA, respectively; and the 5-year local control rates were 90%, 78%, and 82% for EEA, EEAwCA, and CA, respectively. Conclusion: The EEA is a minimally invasive surgical modality with preferable oncological outcomes for the treatment of nasoethmoidal malignancies when adequately planned. Plain Language Summary: Purpose: This study looked at a newer, less invasive surgery called the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA), which goes through the nose to remove tumors in the nose and nearby areas. The goal was to see if this method could be used as a standard treatment. How the Study Was Done: Researchers looked back at 110 patients in Japan who had surgery for cancer in the nose and surrounding areas between 2014 and 2016. They had surgery using one of three methods:EEA (through the nose)CA (a more traditional open surgery)EEA combined with CA (used for more serious cases). What They Found: 1)Most patients had tumors in a part of the nose related to the sense of smell.2)The most common types of cancer were squamous cell carcinoma and a rare nerve-related tumor.3)The EEA was mostly used for early-stage cancers, and the combined method was used for more advanced cases.4)The cancer was completely removed in about 85% of EEA cases, 78% of combined cases, and 64% of traditional cases.5)People who had EEA had fewer side effects, lost less blood, and stayed in the hospital for a shorter time.6)After 5 years, the cancer had not come back in 90% of EEA cases, 78% of combined cases, and 82% of traditional cases.7)Patients who had radiation after surgery or had tumors removed in one piece had better results. Conclusion: The EEA is a safe and effective option for treating certain nose cancers, especially when it's carefully planned. It causes less harm to the body and works well for early-stage cancers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.