Álvaro Sanabria

Comorbidity in head and neck cancer: A critical appraisal and recommendations for practice

Comorbidity, the presence of additional illnesses unrelated to the tumor, has a significant impact on the prognosis of patients with head and neck cancer. In these patients, tobacco and alcohol abuse contributes greatly to comorbidity. Several instruments have been used to quantify comorbidity including Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 (ACE 27), Charlson Index (CI) and Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. The ACE 27 and CI are the most frequently used indices. Information on comorbidity at the time of diagnosis can be abstracted from patient records. Self-reporting is less reliable than record review. Functional status is not a reliable substitute for comorbidity evaluation as a prognostic measure. Severity as well as the presence of a condition is required for a good predictive instrument. Comorbidity increases mortality in patients with head and neck cancer, and this effect is greater in the early years following treatment. In addition to reducing overall survival, many studies have shown that comorbidity influences disease-specific survival negatively, most likely because patients with high comorbidity tend to have delay in diagnosis, often presenting with advanced stage tumors, and the comorbidity may also prompt less aggressive treatment. The impact of comorbidity on survival is greater in younger than in older patients, although it affects both. For specific tumor sites, comorbidity has been shown to negatively influence prognosis in oral, oropharyngeal, laryngeal and salivary gland tumors. Several studies have reported higher incidence and increased severity of treatment complications in patients with high comorbidity burden. Studies have demonstrated a negative impact of comorbidity on quality of life, and increased cost of treatment with higher degree of comorbidity. Our review of the literature suggests that routine collection of comorbidity data will be important in the analysis of survival, quality of life and functional outcomes after treatment as comorbidity has an impact on all of the above. These data should be integrated with tumor-specific staging systems in order to develop better instruments for prognostication, as well as comparing results of different treatment regimens and institutions.

Prophylactic Antibiotics for Mesh Inguinal Hernioplasty: A Meta-analysis

Objective:To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in mesh hernioplasty. Background:Antibiotic prophylaxis use in mesh inguinal hernioplasty is controversial. Available evidence is nonconclusive because of the low number of clinical trials assessing its effectiveness. Some trials have a small sample size that could overestimate or underestimate the real effectiveness of this intervention. Meta-analysis is a good method to improve these methodological flaws. Methods:Meta-analysis intended to measure the benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection rate in adult patients scheduled for mesh inguinal hernioplasty. Six randomized clinical trials were found. Quality was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration criteria. Results:A total of 2507 patients were analyzed. Surgical site infection frequency was 1.38% in the antibiotic group versus 2.89% in the control group (odds ratio = 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.27–0.85). There was no statistical heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis by quality did not show differences in overall results. Conclusion:Antibiotic prophylaxis use in patients submitted to mesh inguinal hernioplasty decreased the rate of surgical site infection by almost 50%.

Late side effects of radioactive iodine on salivary gland function in patients with thyroid cancer

The purpose of this study was to assess the late side effects of radioiodine therapy (RIT) on salivary gland function. One hundred eighty two patients were evaluated.

PREDICTIVE FACTORS FOR COMPLICATIONS IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WHO UNDERWENT HEAD AND NECK ONCOLOGIC SURGERY

Postoperative complications are relevant outcomes in patients with head and neck tumor who have undergone surgery. Few trials have assessed predictive factors in older patients. We assessed the predictive effect of preoperative clinical factors on postoperative complications.

Prophylactic Central Neck Dissection in Stage N0 Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE To assess the disease-free survival results of prophylactic central neck dissection for papillary thyroid carcinoma preoperatively staged as N0. DESIGN Inception cohort. SETTING Head and neck surgery unit at a national oncologic center. PATIENTS Patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of stage N0 papillary thyroid cancer but no previous oncologic treatment, no recurrent tumor, and no distant metastasis. INTERVENTION Central neck dissection intended as curative treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Disease-free survival. Demographic, clinical, therapeutic, pathologic, and neck recurrence information was also collected. RESULTS A total of 266 patients were included. Mean (SD) follow-up time was 6.9 (4.3) years. Ninety percent of patients had a follow-up longer than 2 years. Prophylactic central neck dissection was performed in 136 patients (51.3%). Of those patients who underwent central neck dissection, 112 had metastatic lymph nodes (82.3%). Neck recurrence occurred in 45 patients (16.9%). Overall, 5-year neck disease-free survival was 86.8%; it was 88.2% in the central neck dissection group vs 85.6% in the group that did not undergo central neck dissection (P = .72). In the multivariate analysis, factors related to central neck dissection were macroscopic extrathyroidal extension (odds ratio [OR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-3.79) and multifocality (OR, 3.96; 95% CI, 2.08-7.53). In Cox multivariate analysis for disease-free survival, central neck dissection did not show any significant effect. CONCLUSION Prophylactic central neck dissection did not show any advantage in the rate of neck recurrence in patients with N0 clinical stage disease.

Prophylactic antibiotics in chest trauma: a meta-analysis of high-quality studies.

BackgroundUse of antibiotics in patients with isolated chest trauma is controversial. Available studies offer contradictory results because of small sample sizes. However, information provided by recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) included in a systematic review and meta-analysis could help solve the controversy. We performed a systematic review using high-quality information related to the use of antibiotics in patients with a chest tube.MethodsWe developed a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics in chest-trauma patients. Studies included were class I RCT comparing prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo in patients with isolated chest trauma. Main outcomes were posttraumatic empyema and pneumonia.ResultsFive Class I studies were selected. There were statistically significant differences regarding the frequency of posttraumatic empyema (RR 0.19) and pneumonia (RR 0.44) in favor of the use of prophylactic antibiotics when compared with placebo.ConclusionsThe use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with chest trauma decreases the incidence of posttraumatic empyema and pneumonia.

Proposal for A Rational Classification of Neck Dissections

Alfio Ferlito, MD, DLO, DPath, FRCSEd ad hominem, FRCS (Eng, Glasg, Ir) ad eundem, FDSRCS ad eundem, FHKCORL, FRCPath, FASCP, IFCAP, K. Thomas Robbins, MD, FRCSC, Jatin P. Shah, MD, PhD (Hon), MS, FRCSEd (Hon), FRACS (Hon), FDSRCS, Jesus E. Medina, MD, Carl E. Silver, MD, Shawkat Al-Tamimi, MD, Johannes J. Fagan, MBChB, FCS (SA) MMed, Vinidh Paleri, MS, FRCS (ORL-HNS), Robert P. Takes, MD, PhD, Carol R. Bradford, MD, Kenneth O. Devaney, MD, JD, FCAP, Sandro J. Stoeckli, MD, Randal S. Weber, MD, Patrick J. Bradley, MB, BCh, BAO, DCH, MBA, FRCS (Ed, Eng, Ir), FHKCORL, FRCSLT (Hon), FRACS (Hon), Carlos Suarez, MD, PhD, C. Rene Leemans, MD, PhD, H. Hakan Coskun, MD, Karen T. Pitman, MD, Ashok R. Shaha, MD, Remco de Bree, MD, PhD, Dana M. Hartl, MD, PhD, Missak Haigentz, Jr, MD, Juan P. Rodrigo, MD, PhD, Marc Hamoir, MD, Avi Khafif, MD, Johannes A. Langendijk, MD, PhD, Randall P. Owen, MD, MS, Alvaro Sanabria, MD, MSc, PhD, Primož Strojan, MD, PhD, Vincent Vander Poorten, MD, PhD, Jochen A. Werner, MD, Stanislaw Bien, MD, PhD, Julia A. Woolgar, FRCPath, PhD, Peter Zbaren, MD, Jan Betka, MD, PhD, FCMA, Benedikt J. Folz, MD, Eric M. Genden, MD, Yoav P. Talmi, MD, Marshall Strome, MD, MS, Jesus Herranz Gonzalez Botas, MD, Jan Olofsson, MD, Luiz P. Kowalski, MD, PhD, Jon D. Holmes, DMD, MD, Yasuo Hisa, MD, PhD, Alessandra Rinaldo, MD, FRCSEd ad hominem, FRCS (Eng, Ir) ad eundem, FRCSGlasg

Factors that influence treatment decision in older patients with resectable head and neck cancer

Objectives: To find clinical factors related to administration of substandard treatment in older patients with head and neck cancer.

Sternocleidomastoid muscle flap in preventing Frey's syndrome after parotidectomy: A systematic review

Parotidectomy is a common procedure and Freys syndrome (gustatory sweating) is a common side effect. The current literature was assessed concerning the effectiveness of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) flap to prevent Freys syndrome after parotidectomy.

Neuromonitoring of the laryngeal nerves in thyroid surgery: a critical appraisal of the literature.

One of the most significant complication of thyroid surgery is injury of the recurrent laryngeal nerve. Injury of the external branch of the superior laryngeal nerve is a less obvious but occasionally significant problem. Recently, neuromonitoring during thyroidectomy has received considerable attention because of literature encouraging its use, but there is no consensus about its advantages and utility. A critical assessment of the literature on neuromonitoring was conducted in order to define its effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness and medical-legal impact. Available data does not show results superior to those obtained by traditional anatomical methods of nerve identification during thyroid surgery. Data about cost-effectiveness is scarce. The literature shows inconsistencies in methodology, patient selection and randomization in various published studies which may confound the conclusions of individual investigations. The current recommendation for use in “high risk” patients should be assessed because definition heterogeneity makes identification of these patients difficult. As routine use of neuromonitoring varies according to geography, its use should not be considered to be the standard of care.