Goudakos J K, Markou K, Nikolaou A, Themelis C, Vital V
1(st) Department of Otorhinolaryngology, AHEPA University Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Mar;35(3):223-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2008.04.001. Epub 2008 May 12.
The most effective therapeutic approach for patients with supraglottic laryngeal carcinoma (SGLC) and clinically negative neck (cN0) remains a subject of much debate. The purpose of this systematic review was to answer the following question: among patients with SGLC and cN0 neck, are the survival and occurrence of neck metastases significantly different between patients that received neck dissection and those that had another therapeutic treatment (radiotherapy, combined therapy, 'wait and see' policy)?
An electronic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and CENTRAL databases, followed by extensive hand-searching for the identification of relevant studies. The following inclusion criteria were established: the study should (a) include a comparison of neck dissection with one of the other therapeutic procedures for cN0 of SGLC; (b) report the therapy for the initial supraglottic cancer; and (c) use time-to-event analysis of its results. Six studies were eventually identified and systematically reviewed.
All studies included in the systematic review were retrospective (n=792 patients). The survival (overall, disease-specific and neck disease-free) and the site of neck recurrence of the patients with N0 supraglottic cancer were not significantly different between patients in the neck dissection treatment group and those of the rest of the therapeutic strategies examined (neck radiotherapy, combined therapy and 'wait and see' policy).
The present systematic review highlights the need for further well-designed prospective studies that will provide more reliable answers to the debatable issue of the management of cN0 of SGLC. Currently, based on the best available evidence, it seems that neck dissection is not superior to radiotherapy or combined therapy or a 'wait and see' policy in terms of survival and control of neck disease.
对于声门上型喉癌(SGLC)且临床颈部阴性(cN0)的患者,最有效的治疗方法仍是一个备受争议的话题。本系统评价的目的是回答以下问题:在SGLC且颈部cN0的患者中,接受颈部清扫术的患者与接受其他治疗方法(放疗、联合治疗、“观察等待”策略)的患者相比,其生存率和颈部转移的发生率是否存在显著差异?
在MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆和CENTRAL数据库中进行电子文献检索,随后进行广泛的手工检索以识别相关研究。制定了以下纳入标准:研究应(a)包括对SGLC颈部cN0患者颈部清扫术与其他治疗方法之一的比较;(b)报告初始声门上癌的治疗方法;(c)对其结果进行事件发生时间分析。最终确定并系统评价了六项研究。
纳入系统评价的所有研究均为回顾性研究(n = 792例患者)。颈部清扫术治疗组患者与其他所研究治疗策略组(颈部放疗、联合治疗和“观察等待”策略)患者相比,N0声门上癌患者的生存率(总体、疾病特异性和颈部无病生存率)以及颈部复发部位无显著差异。
本系统评价强调需要进一步开展设计良好的前瞻性研究,以便为SGLC颈部cN0管理这一有争议的问题提供更可靠的答案。目前,基于现有最佳证据,就生存率和颈部疾病控制而言,颈部清扫术似乎并不优于放疗、联合治疗或“观察等待”策略。