Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Clin Otolaryngol ; 47(5): 561-567, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874404

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To report the incidence of locoregional recurrence in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients under surveillance following treatment undergoing symptom-based remote assessment. DESIGN: A 16-week multicentre prospective cohort study. SETTING: UK ENT departments. PARTICIPANTS: HNC patients under surveillance following treatment undergoing symptom-based telephone assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of locoregional recurrent HNC after minimum 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Data for 1078 cases were submitted by 16 centres, with follow-up data completed in 98.9% (n = 1066). Following telephone consultation, 83.7% of referrals had their face-to-face appointments deferred (n = 897/1072). New symptoms were reported by 11.6% (n = 124/1072) at telephone assessment; 72.6% (n = 90/124) of this group were called for urgent assessments, of whom 48.9% (n = 44/90) came directly for imaging without preceding clinical review. The sensitivity and specificity for new symptoms as an indicator of cancer recurrence were 35.3% and 89.4%, respectively, with a negative predictive value of 99.7% (p = .002). Locoregional cancer identification rates after a minimum of 6 months of further monitoring, when correlated with time since treatment, were 6.0% (n = 14/233) <1 year; 2.1% (n = 16/747) between 1 and 5 years; and 4.3% (n = 4/92) for those >5 years since treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone assessment, using patient-reported symptoms, to identify recurrent locoregional HNC was widely adopted during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. The majority of patients had no face-to-face reviews or investigations. New symptoms were significantly associated with the identification of locoregional recurrent cancers with a high specificity, but a low sensitivity may limit symptom assessment being used as the sole surveillance method.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Head and Neck Neoplasms , COVID-19/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/diagnosis , Head and Neck Neoplasms/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnosis , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/therapy , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Referral and Consultation , Symptom Assessment , Telephone
2.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-313732

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To review the operative feasibility and functional outcomes following dual flap reconstruction of circumferential pharyngeal defects. Design Retrospective case series Setting University Hospital Monklands, a district general hospital Participants Eight patients undergoing either primary (n=5) or salvage (n=3) circumferential laryngopharyngectomy +/- cervical oesophagectomy, followed by dual flap reconstruction, with a deltopectoral flap to reconstruct the posterior wall. Main Outcome Measures Operative complications, hospital stay and functional outcomes (speech and swallowing) Results The operation was feasible in all patients, with dual flap reconstruction using a deltopectoral flap, combined with a pectoralis major flap (n=5) or a supraclavicular flap (n=3). All patients developed a small, lateralised, self-healing fistula at the site of the deltopectoral flap 3-point junction. This did not require any intervention, or impact on adjuvant treatment. Functional outcomes were favourable, with all patients achieving oral diet. One patient required gastrostomy diet supplementation, and one patient required stricture dilatation. Of the patients able to receive a speech valve (n=4), all achieved intelligible speech. Two patients could not receive a speech valve due to the inferior extent of the tumour resection, and trachea-oesophageal puncture has been delayed in 2 patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions Dual flap reconstruction of circumferential pharyngeal defects represents a simple, effective option for a complex reconstructive problem. The predictable operative recovery and favourable functional outcomes indicate that the use of both a deltopectoral flap and a second flap is a robust reconstructive solution.

3.
Cancer ; 127(22): 4177-4189, 2021 11 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1363649

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Remote triage for suspected head and neck cancer (HNC) referrals was adopted by many institutions during the initial peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Its safety in this population has not been established. METHODS: A 16-week, prospective, multicenter national service evaluation was started on March 23, 2020. Suspected HNC referrals undergoing remote triage in UK secondary care centers were identified and followed up for a minimum of 6 months to record the cancer status. Triage was supported by risk stratification using a validated calculator. RESULTS: Data for 4568 cases were submitted by 41 centers serving a population of approximately 26 million. These represented 14.1% of the predicted maximum referrals for this population outside of pandemic times, and this gave the study a margin of error of 1.34% at 95% confidence. Completed 6-month follow-up data were available for 99.8% with an overall cancer rate of 5.6% (254 of 4557). The rates of triage were as follows: urgent imaging investigation, 25.4% (n = 1156); urgent face-to-face review, 27.8%; (n = 1268); assessment deferral, 30.3% (n = 1382); and discharge, 16.4% (n = 749). The corresponding missed cancers rates were 0.5% (5 of 1048), 0.3% (3 of 1149), 0.9% (12 of 1382), and 0.9% (7 of 747; P = .15). The negative predictive value for a nonurgent triage outcome and no cancer diagnosis was 99.1%. Overall harm was reported in 0.24% (11 of 4557) and was highest for deferred assessments (0.58%; 8 of 1382). CONCLUSIONS: Remote triage, incorporating risk stratification, may facilitate targeted investigations for higher risk patients and prevent unnecessary hospital attendance for lower risk patients. The risk of harm is low and may be reduced further with appropriate safety netting of deferred appointments. LAY SUMMARY: This large national study observed the widespread adoption of telephone assessment (supported by a risk calculator) of patients referred to hospital specialists with suspected head and neck cancer during the initial peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The authors identified 4568 patients from 41 UK centers (serving a population of more than 26 million people) who were followed up for a minimum of 6 months. Late cancers were identified, whether reviewed or investigated urgently (0.4%) or nonurgently (0.9%), but the overall rate of harm was low (0.2%), with the highest rate being seen with deferred appointments (0.6%).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Head and Neck Neoplasms/diagnosis , Remote Consultation/methods , Triage/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Child , Child, Preschool , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Head and Neck Neoplasms/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Remote Consultation/standards , Risk Assessment/methods , Triage/standards , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Young Adult
4.
Otol Neurotol ; 42(4): 606-613, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-913295

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the Covid-19 pandemic, otolaryngologists are at risk due to aerosol-generating procedures such as mastoidectomy and need enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE). Eye protection can interfere with the use of a microscope due to a reduction in the field of vision. We aimed to study the effect of PPE on the microsurgical field. METHODS: Five surgeons measured the visual field using digital calipers at different power settings. They were done with no PPE, a surgical mask, FFP3 mask (N99), and with the addition of small goggles, large vistamax goggles, vistamax plus a face shield, and only a face shield. The measurements were repeated with rings of 5 mm increments. We also measured the "eye relief" of the microscope which is the ideal distance for maximum field of view. RESULTS: There was no major reduction of the field with the surgical or FFP3 mask. But even simple goggles reduced the field up to 31.6% and there were progressive reductions of up to 75.7% with large goggles, 76.8% when a face shield was added, and 61.9% when only face shield was used. The distance rings more than 5 mm also affected the field of view.The eye relief of our eyepiece was found to be 15 mm. CONCLUSION: The current PPE eye protection is not compatible with the use of a microscope. There is scope for research into better eye protection. Mitigation strategies including barrier drapes and alternative techniques such as endoscopic surgery or use of exoscopes should also be considered.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Microsurgery , Otolaryngologists , Personal Protective Equipment/adverse effects , Visual Fields , COVID-19/transmission , Humans , Mastoidectomy/adverse effects , Microsurgery/instrumentation , Microsurgery/methods , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1674-1680, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-291714

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Outpatient telemedicine consultations are being adopted to triage patients for head and neck cancer. However, there is currently no established structure to frame this consultation. METHODS: For suspected referrals with cancer, we adapted the Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator (HaNC-RC)-V.2, generated from 10 244 referrals with the following diagnostic efficacy metrics: 85% sensitivity, 98.6% negative predictive value, and area under the curve of 0.89. For follow-up patients, a symptom inventory generated from 5123 follow-up consultations was used. A customized Excel Data Tool was created, trialed across professional groups and made freely available for download at www.entintegrate.co.uk/entuk2wwtt, alongside a user guide, protocol, and registration link for the project. Stakeholder support was obtained from national bodies. RESULTS: No remote consultations were refused by patients. Preliminary data from 511 triaging episodes at 13 centers show that 77.1% of patients were discharged directly or have had their appointments deferred. DISCUSSION: Significant reduction in footfall can be achieved using a structured triaging system. Further refinement of HaNC-RC-V.2 is feasible and the authors welcome international collaboration.


Subject(s)
Continuity of Patient Care , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/diagnosis , Head and Neck Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Referral and Consultation , Risk Assessment/methods , Triage/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Clinical Decision-Making , Evidence-Based Practice , Humans , Medical Oncology/methods , Pandemics , Predictive Value of Tests , Remote Consultation , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment , United Kingdom/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL