Lee Maxwell Y, Belfiglio Mario, Zeng Johnathan, Fleming Christopher W, Koyfman Shlomo, Joshi Nikhil P, Lamarre Eric, Prendes Brandon, Scharpf Joseph, Lorenz Robert R, Woody Neil M, Adelstein David J, Geiger Jessica L, Chute Deborah J, Ku Jamie A
Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Laryngoscope. 2023 May;133(5):1122-1131. doi: 10.1002/lary.30254. Epub 2022 Jun 26.
Organ preservation (OP) treatment for advanced laryngeal cancer has increased compared to primary total laryngectomy. Our study compares oncologic and functional outcomes between these approaches.
Retrospective cohort study.
Single tertiary care institution.
Retrospective review of patients receiving primary total laryngectomy or OP for laryngeal cancer between 1/1/2000 and 12/31/2018.
A total of 118 patients received primary total laryngectomy and 119 received OP. Overall survival was similar between total laryngectomy and OP. When stratified by T stage, disease-free survival was worse among T3 patients receiving OP versus total laryngectomy. In T3 patients, 28 OP patients experienced local recurrence (28.9%) compared to 3 total laryngectomy patients (7.1%; p < 0.01). In total, 20 OP patients with local recurrence received salvage surgery. These patients had similar overall survival to patients who underwent initial total laryngectomy (TL). About 14 OP patients with local recurrence did not receive salvage surgery. About 89 (75.4%) TL patients achieved normal diet as compared to 64 (53.8%) OP patients (p < 0.001). In TL patients, 106 (89.8%) received primary or secondary tracheoesophageal-prosthesis, 82 (77.4%) of whom achieved completely understandable speech.
There was no difference in survival by treatment in T4 patients, possibly because of strict patient selection. However, disease-free survival was worse in T3 patients receiving OP, likely due to a high local recurrence rate. Approximately 40% of patients with local recurrence were not eligible for salvage laryngectomy. TL patients had comparable swallowing and speech outcomes with OP patients.
3 Laryngoscope, 133:1122-1131, 2023.
与一期全喉切除术相比,晚期喉癌的器官保留(OP)治疗有所增加。我们的研究比较了这两种治疗方法的肿瘤学和功能结果。
回顾性队列研究。
单一三级医疗机构。
回顾性分析2000年1月1日至2018年12月31日期间接受一期全喉切除术或OP治疗喉癌的患者。
共有118例患者接受了一期全喉切除术,119例接受了OP治疗。全喉切除术和OP治疗的总生存率相似。按T分期分层时,接受OP治疗的T3患者与接受全喉切除术的患者相比,无病生存率较差。在T3患者中,28例接受OP治疗的患者出现局部复发(28.9%),而全喉切除术患者中有3例(7.1%;p<0.01)。总共有20例局部复发的OP患者接受了挽救性手术。这些患者的总生存率与接受初始全喉切除术(TL)的患者相似。约14例局部复发的OP患者未接受挽救性手术。与64例(53.8%)接受OP治疗的患者相比,约89例(75.4%)接受TL治疗的患者饮食正常(p<0.001)。在接受TL治疗的患者中,106例(89.8%)接受了一期或二期气管食管假体植入,其中82例(77.4%)实现了完全可理解的言语交流。
T4期患者的生存情况在两种治疗方法之间没有差异,这可能是由于严格的患者选择。然而,接受OP治疗的T3期患者无病生存率较差,可能是由于局部复发率较高。约40%的局部复发患者不符合挽救性喉切除术的条件。接受TL治疗的患者在吞咽和言语功能方面与接受OP治疗的患者相当。
3《喉镜》,133:1122 - 1131,2023年。