ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare functional and oncological treatment outcomes among patients with supraglottic laryngeal cancers who underwent transoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy and open supraglottic laryngectomy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of 17 patients treated by transoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy and 20 patients treated by open supraglottic laryngectomy. RESULTS: No tracheostomy or prolonged intubation was needed in the transoral robotic surgery group. Furthermore, that group had a shorter oral feeding time, hospitalisation and recovery period. There was no difference between groups in terms of complications. There were no differences in overall survival time and disease-specific survival time between groups. CONCLUSION: Transoral robotic supraglottic laryngectomy for supraglottic laryngeal cancer is an oncologically safe and functional procedure with better results when compared to conventional open surgery.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery , Laryngeal Neoplasms/surgery , Laryngectomy/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/radiotherapy , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Female , Glottis/surgery , Humans , Laryngeal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Laryngeal Neoplasms/pathology , Laryngeal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Larynx/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Care/methods , Retrospective Studies , Survival Analysis , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Most patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction have dry, crusty nasal mucosa. Mucociliary clearance is modulated by the amount and biochemical composition of nasal mucus. Nasolacrimal duct obstruction disturbs the drainage of tears into the nasal cavity. OBJECTIVE: We examined the effect of nasolacrimal duct obstruction on the mucociliary transport of nasal mucosa, by comparing saccharine test results for epiphora patients versus healthy volunteers. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, clinical trial. METHODS: Eight patients with bilateral epiphora and 10 patients with unilateral epiphora were included in the study group. Complete nasolacrimal duct obstruction was demonstrated by studying irrigation of the nasolacrimal system, and by fluorescein dye study. The control group comprised 20 healthy volunteers. Mucociliary transport was assessed by the saccharine test in both the study and control groups. The saccharine transit times of 26 impaired nasal cavities were compared with those of 20 healthy nasal cavities of controls. Also, the saccharine transit times of the healthy nasal cavities of the 10 patients with unilateral epiphora were compared with those of their diseased sides, and also with those of healthy volunteers. RESULTS: The saccharine transit times of the epiphora patients were statistically significantly greater than those of the control group. Also, there was a statistically significant difference in saccharine transit times, comparing the healthy and impaired nasal cavities of patients with unilateral epiphora. CONCLUSION: Nasolacrimal duct obstruction has a negative effect on nasal mucociliary clearance. This may be related to changes in the amount and biochemical composition of nasal mucus.
