Home contents
2016
   N# 1 |
2015
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2014
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2013
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2012
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2011
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2010
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2009
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2008
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2007
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2006
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2005
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2004
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2003
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2002
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2001
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2000
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1999
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1998
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
1997
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1996
   N# 4 | 5 |

Click on the number of the review to see the content
Teaching bulletin CME
List of all teaching bulletins CME.
Editor reading committee
Editor reading committee.
To publish...
Instructions for authors
Archives Press and Books
Select of books and press articles.
Mailing list
News information letter.
Subscription prices


If you wish to adjust the size of the displayed characters, click in the high menu on "Your account" and choose the desired size.



  Contents > Previous page > Article detail print Order
o Issue N# 2 - 2011 o

HEAD AND NECK CARCINOLOGY

Combined transoral and suprahyoid approach for oro­pharyngeal cancers: an alternative to mandibulo­tomy


Authors : Gallet P, Gangloff P, Mastronicola R, Cortese S, Phulpin B, Mecellem H, Kaminski MC, Guillet J, Dolivet G. (Nancy)

Ref. : Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol. 2011;132,2:95-102.

Article published in english
Downloadable PDF document english



Summary : Surgical treatment of oropharyngeal tumours usually requires mandibular osteotomy. Using this technique allows a better exposure and an easier excision, but this approach often generates complications. Since 1995, we used a less aggressive surgical technique, with a suprahyoid pharyngotomy when the oral approach was not sufficient, thus sparing the mandible. Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate this techni­cal evolution, ensuring that mandibular preservation doesn’t affect quality of exeresis, local control and survival, while allowing a lower complication rate. Material and methods: All patients who have had a surgical treatment for an oropharyn­geal carcinoma between 1995 and 2001 in our center were inclu­ded in this study. Results: Mandibular sparing was used for 55 patients; 19 patients underwent mandibulotomy. The surgical procedure’s quality was classified as clear, close, or insufficient margins. All adjuvant treatments were noted, func­tional and carcinologic results were evaluated. No significant differences are found for exeresis quality and local control. There are less complications (p= 0.045) and less surgical revi­sions (p= 0.023) in the preservation group. Survival and functional results are better in the preservation group, but without significant difference. For oropharyngeal tumours, survival is dependent on tumoural aggressivity, on general condition and co-morbidity and on the development of a second tumour. Results in local control rate (83.7% at 1 year) are satisfying compared to literature. Conclusion: Mandibular preservation is an efficient and safe procedure, even for T3/T4 tumours. Most of oropharyngeal tumours can be removed without mandibulotomy. The suprahyoid approach provides a good exposure when oral approach is insufficient, thus avoi­ding mandibulotomy and its complications.

Price : 10.50 €      order
|


Subscribe online - Pay by credit card!


© Copyright 1999-2017 - Revue de Laryngologie   Réalisation - Hébergement ELIDEE