Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach

Abstract Objective Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has evolved since its 2009 US Food and Drug Administration approval for use in local stage T1–T2 oropharyngeal carcinoma. The ability to resect increasingly larger and more complex lesions has led to the need to introduce reconstructive techniques...

Szczegółowa specyfikacja

Opis bibliograficzny
Główni autorzy: David Virós Porcuna, Constanza Viña Soria, Jordi Vila Poyatos, Mar Palau Viarnès, Paloma Malagon López, Carlota Gonzàlez Lluch, Carmen Higueras Suñe, Carlos M. Pollán Guisasola, Cristian Carrasco López
Format: Artykuł
Język:English
Wydane: Wiley 2023-12-01
Seria:Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
Hasła przedmiotowe:
Dostęp online:https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.1176
_version_ 1827578306615050240
author David Virós Porcuna
Constanza Viña Soria
Jordi Vila Poyatos
Mar Palau Viarnès
Paloma Malagon López
Carlota Gonzàlez Lluch
Carmen Higueras Suñe
Carlos M. Pollán Guisasola
Cristian Carrasco López
author_facet David Virós Porcuna
Constanza Viña Soria
Jordi Vila Poyatos
Mar Palau Viarnès
Paloma Malagon López
Carlota Gonzàlez Lluch
Carmen Higueras Suñe
Carlos M. Pollán Guisasola
Cristian Carrasco López
author_sort David Virós Porcuna
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Objective Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has evolved since its 2009 US Food and Drug Administration approval for use in local stage T1–T2 oropharyngeal carcinoma. The ability to resect increasingly larger and more complex lesions has led to the need to introduce reconstructive techniques through this route, avoiding the classic transmandibular or pull‐through approach. Few studies have compared the safety, efficacy, and advantages of TORS versus classic open approaches in oropharyngeal salvage surgery with reconstruction using microanastomosed flaps. Here we retrospectively compare our center's experience with the open approach and TORS and describe the technical variations used. Methods Between 2013 and 2021, 30 stage III–IV oropharyngeal cancer patients underwent salvage surgery with reconstruction in our center. From 2013 to 2017, 15 patients underwent surgery with the classic open approach, and from 2018 to 2021, an additional 15 patients underwent TORS. We have compared surgical outcomes, post‐surgical results, and survival in the two groups. Results Patient characteristics were similar in the two groups. TORS was associated with shorter surgical time (p < .001), fewer complications (p = .01), shorter hospital stay (p < .001), and lower feeding tube requirements (p = .003). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the free margin rate or survival. Conclusion Oropharyngeal salvage surgery with TORS with free flap reconstruction reduced associated morbidity compared to the open approach in a patient cohort with poor prognosis. Level of Evidence 4.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T21:44:50Z
format Article
id doaj.art-3bc3333a862c4c0aabe027c23cfbfb64
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2378-8038
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T21:44:50Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
spelling doaj.art-3bc3333a862c4c0aabe027c23cfbfb642023-12-20T09:48:34ZengWileyLaryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology2378-80382023-12-01861564157010.1002/lio2.1176Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approachDavid Virós Porcuna0Constanza Viña Soria1Jordi Vila Poyatos2Mar Palau Viarnès3Paloma Malagon López4Carlota Gonzàlez Lluch5Carmen Higueras Suñe6Carlos M. Pollán Guisasola7Cristian Carrasco López8Otolaryngology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainOtolaryngology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainOtolaryngology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainOtolaryngology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainOtolaryngology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona SpainAbstract Objective Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) has evolved since its 2009 US Food and Drug Administration approval for use in local stage T1–T2 oropharyngeal carcinoma. The ability to resect increasingly larger and more complex lesions has led to the need to introduce reconstructive techniques through this route, avoiding the classic transmandibular or pull‐through approach. Few studies have compared the safety, efficacy, and advantages of TORS versus classic open approaches in oropharyngeal salvage surgery with reconstruction using microanastomosed flaps. Here we retrospectively compare our center's experience with the open approach and TORS and describe the technical variations used. Methods Between 2013 and 2021, 30 stage III–IV oropharyngeal cancer patients underwent salvage surgery with reconstruction in our center. From 2013 to 2017, 15 patients underwent surgery with the classic open approach, and from 2018 to 2021, an additional 15 patients underwent TORS. We have compared surgical outcomes, post‐surgical results, and survival in the two groups. Results Patient characteristics were similar in the two groups. TORS was associated with shorter surgical time (p < .001), fewer complications (p = .01), shorter hospital stay (p < .001), and lower feeding tube requirements (p = .003). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the free margin rate or survival. Conclusion Oropharyngeal salvage surgery with TORS with free flap reconstruction reduced associated morbidity compared to the open approach in a patient cohort with poor prognosis. Level of Evidence 4.https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.1176free flap reconstructionoropharyngeal canceroropharynxrobotic surgery
spellingShingle David Virós Porcuna
Constanza Viña Soria
Jordi Vila Poyatos
Mar Palau Viarnès
Paloma Malagon López
Carlota Gonzàlez Lluch
Carmen Higueras Suñe
Carlos M. Pollán Guisasola
Cristian Carrasco López
Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
free flap reconstruction
oropharyngeal cancer
oropharynx
robotic surgery
title Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
title_full Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
title_fullStr Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
title_full_unstemmed Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
title_short Oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction: Transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
title_sort oropharyngeal free flap reconstruction transoral robotic surgery versus open approach
topic free flap reconstruction
oropharyngeal cancer
oropharynx
robotic surgery
url https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.1176
work_keys_str_mv AT davidvirosporcuna oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT constanzavinasoria oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT jordivilapoyatos oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT marpalauviarnes oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT palomamalagonlopez oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT carlotagonzalezlluch oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT carmenhiguerassune oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT carlosmpollanguisasola oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach
AT cristiancarrascolopez oropharyngealfreeflapreconstructiontransoralroboticsurgeryversusopenapproach