Early postoperative functional outcomes following transoral surgery for oropharyngeal cancer: A systematic review

Head & Neck ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Stephen ◽  
Jennifer M. Murphy ◽  
Fiona R. Beyer ◽  
Diane Sellstrom ◽  
Vinidh Paleri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oropharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Transoral Surgery

Comparison of functional outcomes and quality of life between transoral surgery and definitive chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal cancer

Head & Neck ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 381-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen M. Chen ◽  
Megan E. Daly ◽  
Quang Luu ◽  
Paul J. Donald ◽  
D. Gregory Farwell
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Oropharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Transoral Surgery ◽  
Definitive Chemoradiotherapy

scholarly journals Functional outcomes after TORS for oropharyngeal cancer: a systematic review

2014 ◽  
Vol 272 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine A. Hutcheson ◽  
F. Christopher Holsinger ◽  
Michael E. Kupferman ◽  
Jan S. Lewin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oropharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Functional Outcomes

scholarly journals Surgical, clinical and functional outcomes of transoral robotic surgery for supraglottic laryngeal cancers: A systematic review

Oral Oncology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 104848 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome R. Lechien ◽  
Nicolas Fakhry ◽  
Sven Saussez ◽  
Carlos-Miguel Chiesa-Estomba ◽  
Younes Chekkoury-Idrissi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Transoral Robotic Surgery

scholarly journals Rise and fall of total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 11,366 patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Anania ◽  
Richard Justin Davies ◽  
Alberto Arezzo ◽  
Francesco Bagolini ◽  
Vito D’Andrea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Total Mesorectal Excision ◽  
Neoadjuvant Therapy ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Mesorectal Excision ◽  
Timeline Analysis

Abstract The role of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) during total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer is still controversial. Many reviews were published on prophylactic LLND in rectal cancer surgery, some biased by heterogeneity of overall associated treatments. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a timeline analysis of different treatments associated to prophylactic LLND vs no-LLND during TME for rectal cancer. Methods A literature search was performed in PubMed, SCOPUS and WOS for publications up to 1 September 2020. We considered RCTs and CCTs comparing oncologic and functional outcomes of TME with or without LLND in patients with rectal cancer. Results Thirty-four included articles and 29 studies enrolled 11,606 patients. No difference in 5-year local recurrence (in every subgroup analysis including preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy), 5-year distant and overall recurrence, 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival was found between LLND group and non LLND group. The analysis of post-operative functional outcomes reported hindered quality of life (urinary, evacuatory and sexual dysfunction) in LLND patients when compared to non LLND. Conclusion Our publication does not demonstrate that TME with LLND has any oncological advantage when compared to TME alone, showing that with the advent of neoadjuvant therapy, the advantage of LLND is lost. In this review, the most important bias is the heterogeneous characteristics of patients, cancer staging, different neoadjuvant therapy, different radiotherapy techniques and fractionation used in different studies. Higher rate of functional post-operative complications does not support routinely use of LLND.

Systematic review and meta‐analysis of racial survival disparities among oropharyngeal cancer cases by HPV status

Head & Neck ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (10) ◽  
pp. 2985-3001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Stein ◽  
Nicholas R. Lenze ◽  
Wendell G. Yarbrough ◽  
D. Neil Hayes ◽  
Angela Mazul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oropharyngeal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hpv Status

scholarly journals Synthetic bone graft versus autograft or allograft for spinal fusion: a systematic review

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zorica Buser ◽  
Darrel S. Brodke ◽  
Jim A. Youssef ◽  
Hans-Joerg Meisel ◽  
Sue Lynn Myhre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Bone Graft ◽  
Spinal Fusion ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Retrospective Studies ◽  
Synthetic Bone ◽  
Synthetic Bone Graft ◽  
Bone Graft Substitutes

The purpose of this review was to compare the efficacy and safety of synthetic bone graft substitutes versus autograft or allograft for the treatment of lumbar and cervical spinal degenerative diseases. Multiple major medical reference databases were searched for studies that evaluated spinal fusion using synthetic bone graft substitutes (either alone or with an autograft or allograft) compared with autograft and allograft. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies with more than 10 patients were included. Radiographic fusion, patient-reported outcomes, and functional outcomes were the primary outcomes of interest. The search yielded 214 citations with 27 studies that met the inclusion criteria. For the patients with lumbar spinal degenerative disease, data from 19 comparative studies were included: 3 RCTs, 12 prospective, and 4 retrospective studies. Hydroxyapatite (HA), HA+collagen, β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP), calcium sulfate, or polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) were used. Overall, there were no differences between the treatment groups in terms of fusion, functional outcomes, or complications, except in 1 study that found higher rates of HA graft absorption. For the patients with cervical degenerative conditions, data from 8 comparative studies were included: 4 RCTs and 4 cohort studies (1 prospective and 3 retrospective studies). Synthetic grafts included HA, β-TCP/HA, PMMA, and biocompatible osteoconductive polymer (BOP). The PMMA and BOP grafts led to lower fusion rates, and PMMA, HA, and BOP had greater risks of graft fragmentation, settling, and instrumentation problems compared with iliac crest bone graft. The overall quality of evidence evaluating the potential use and superiority of the synthetic biological materials for lumbar and cervical fusion in this systematic review was low or insufficient, largely due to the high potential for bias and small sample sizes. Thus, definitive conclusions or recommendations regarding the use of these synthetic materials should be made cautiously and within the context of the limitations of the evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document