Version 1
: Received: 5 June 2024 / Approved: 6 June 2024 / Online: 6 June 2024 (12:40:32 CEST)
How to cite:
Langer, C.; Glatt, F.; Wagner, S.; Knitschke, M.; Sharma, S. J.; Wittekindt, C. Laser-Assisted versus Open Cordectomy for Early Glottic Cancer. Preprints2024, 2024060391. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0391.v1
Langer, C.; Glatt, F.; Wagner, S.; Knitschke, M.; Sharma, S. J.; Wittekindt, C. Laser-Assisted versus Open Cordectomy for Early Glottic Cancer. Preprints 2024, 2024060391. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0391.v1
Langer, C.; Glatt, F.; Wagner, S.; Knitschke, M.; Sharma, S. J.; Wittekindt, C. Laser-Assisted versus Open Cordectomy for Early Glottic Cancer. Preprints2024, 2024060391. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0391.v1
APA Style
Langer, C., Glatt, F., Wagner, S., Knitschke, M., Sharma, S. J., & Wittekindt, C. (2024). Laser-Assisted versus Open Cordectomy for Early Glottic Cancer. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0391.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Langer, C., Shachi Jenny Sharma and Claus Wittekindt. 2024 "Laser-Assisted versus Open Cordectomy for Early Glottic Cancer" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202406.0391.v1
Abstract
Purpose: Early glottic cancer is a highly curable malignancy. Disease control is achieved by resec-tion or external beam radiation with similar long-term results according survival. Surgery is predominantly performed by transoral endoscopic approach, due to reduced complication rates when compared to open cordectomy. Open cordectomy might still be warranted in cases of inad-equate surgical accessibility. Aim of the present study was to compare endoscopic versus open approach in relation to complications and outcome in an up-to-date patient group. Methods: 219 patients underwent primary tumor resection in early glottic cancer (UICC stages I-II). 168 opera-tions were performed endoscopically, 51 operations were open transcervical cordectomies. We compared survival data with non-parametric methods and functional outcome according to need of tracheostomy, feeding tube and voice functional outcome following ELS protocol. Results: There were no significant differences in overall survival (OS). 2 years OS after endoscopic surgery was 90.5% vs 95.3% after transcervical resection. As expected, OS in T1b and T2 tumors was worse than in T1a tumors. We found a statistically significant difference in disease free survival (DFS) within the T1a and T1b/T2 group (Log rank test: p=0.006) but no relevant difference be-tween the two surgical modalities, even when the data was stratified by T-categories performing a Cox regression (hazard ratio 1.21, p=0.712). Patients who underwent open surgery had a sig-nificantly worse peri- and postoperative course with longer hospital stay, higher frequency of tracheotomies and longer need for nasogastric tubes. Functional results were comparable within the two patient groups while higher tumor size / stage was an unfavorable predictor for voice re-habilitation. Conclusion: Open cordectomy leads to more complications but offers comparable oncological and functional outcome when compared to transoral endoscopic approach in early glottic cancer. Open surgery therefore continues to be a valid treatment option when endoscopic resection is not possible.
Keywords
cordectomy; open approach; functional outcome; early glottic cancer; head and neck cancer
Subject
Medicine and Pharmacology, Otolaryngology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
,
,
