ABSTRACT
For years, cancer has been one of the diseases that causes the greatest disease burden in the Netherlands. Cancer does not only have a huge impact on patients and their loved ones, but also on society and healthcare. If the number of cancer patients increases further in the coming years, this impact will only aggravate. This development will also impact dental practice. It is therefore important to assess what awaits us in the coming years. Both with regard to supporting and treating (former) oncology patients. Forinstance, detecting secondary effects of cancer treatments such as oral mucositis and medication- and radiation-related jaw necrosis, as well as the early detection of oral cavity carcinomas and sun-related skin damage on the lips and face. Based on this, plans can be made to meet the demand for dental care as well as possible and to reduce the impact of cancer for both the individual patient and for society as a whole.
Subject(s)
Lip , Mouth Neoplasms , Humans , NetherlandsABSTRACT
As a result of an increase in the incidence of oral cancer and improving survival rates, the number of patients needing follow-up care will increase in the Netherlands. At present, these patients enroll in a 5-year follow-up programme aiming for early detection of recurrences or second primary tumors and improving their prognosis of life expectancy, among other things. Recurrences mostly occur in the first 2 years after treatment, whereas patients have a lifelong elevated risk of second primary tumors. 75% of second primary tumors occur outside the oral cavity and over 50% outside the head and neck area, places not routinely checked. There is no convincing evidence this 5-year follow-up programme yields survival benefits. It would therefore be better to limit follow-up care to 2 years and choose a subsequent follow-up programme better tailored to the individual patient's needs. This does not necessarily require the lead of a head and neck oncologist.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/therapy , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Mouth , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Netherlands/epidemiology , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckABSTRACT
The oral cavity is the commonest subsite of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Because of the rising incidence and increasing survival, more patients will be enrolled in a routine follow-up program. This review gives an overview of the evidence and guideline recommendations concerning follow-up after oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). There is limited evidence concerning the effectiveness of follow-up after OSCC. This lack of evidence is reflected in a variation in guideline recommendations with respect to test interval and duration (i.e. for 3-5 years or lifelong). Most studies on the value of routine follow-up after curative treatment include all HNSCC subsites. The available literature shows, that these subsites have a different timing of recurrence and a different risk of second primary tumors at different locations. This leaves no rationale for applying the same follow-up program to each of the HNSCC subsites. There is agreement in the literature that OSCC follow-up can either be discontinued after two or three years or should be lifelong based on the risk of second primary tumors. Many authors advocate a personalized follow-up regimen that is based on the risk of new disease rather than a one-size-fits-all surveillance program. The literature is conflicting about the survival benefits of asymptomatic detection of new disease for HNSCC. To aid the development of evidence-based follow-up advise after OSCC, future research should focus on risk stratification, the value of symptom-free detection of recurrences and the active role that patients might play in determining their own follow-up regimen.
Subject(s)
Aftercare/standards , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/therapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Mouth Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnosis , Neoplasms, Second Primary/diagnosis , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Risk Assessment , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckSubject(s)
Clinical Competence , Fasting/adverse effects , Medical Errors , Surgical Procedures, Operative , Dehydration , Fasting/physiology , Fatigue , Humans , Hunger , Islam , Psychomotor Performance/physiology , Religion , Risk Factors , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Surgical Procedures, Operative/standardsABSTRACT
Free vascularized graft or free-flap reconstruction is frequently used in the reconstruction of defects in head and neck oncology patients. A common complication in free-flap surgery is thrombosis. Thrombosis occurs in 8-14% of cases and often leads to flap failure. A review of the literature on this subject was carried out and Dutch head and neck cancer centres were asked to share their guidelines concerning the prevention of thrombosis after free vascularized graft surgery. No consensus in the literature was found on how thrombosis could best be prevented. The Dutch Head and Neck Cancer Centers use routine deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis to prevent thrombosis in the anastomosis. It was also concluded that non-pharmacologic measures for preventing thrombosis, such as meticulous microvascular surgery and smoking cessation prior to the operation, are thought to play an important role in the prevention of thrombosis in microvascular free-flap reconstructions. It has not been determined which pre- and postoperative pharmacologic measure can prevent thrombosis most effectively. A pharmacologic regimen to prevent thrombosis that is customized to the patient is suggested. This should be based on an individual risk profile for the development of thrombosis.
