To preserve or not to preserve the orbit in paranasal sinus neoplasms: a meta-analysis

Orbital and periocular complications in patients with sinonasal tumours with orbital invasion

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency and associated risk factors of orbital/periocular complications in patients with sinonasal tumour with orbital invasion managed with eye-sparing treatments.

METHODS

A retrospective case series of patients with primary sinonasal tumour with orbital invasion from January 2008 to December 2018. Patient factors were compared between the following groups: (1)patients with orbital/periocular complications versus those who did not and (2) patients who needed secondary oculoplastic surgical procedures versus those who did not.

RESULTS

Out of 80 patients, 48 had eye-sparing surgery, 8 had orbital exenteration and 24 were managed non-surgically. The most common histology was squamous cell carcinoma (n=28, 35%). Among the eye-sparing treatment group, 51/72 patients experienced one or more orbital/periocular complication(s), with motility deficit (N=26, 36%) being the most frequent. Factors associated with higher risk of complications included tumour involving the orbital floor (p=0.019), clinical disease stage III/IV (p=0.038), maxillectomy (p=0.004), resection of the orbital floor (p=0.027) and cigarette smoking (p=0.041). Tumour involving the orbital floor had an OR of 3.9 (95% CI 1.3 to 11.6, p=0.016) in predicting orbital/periocular complication. In the eye-sparing surgery group, the most frequent secondary oculoplastic procedures was dacryocystorhinostomy (n=6, 13%). The use of a free flap in reconstruction had an OR of 8.2 (95% CI 2.1 to 31.8, p=0.002) in predicting need for secondary oculoplastic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Majority of patients with sinonasal tumours and secondary orbital invasion were managed with eye-sparing multidisciplinary treatments. Preservation of the eye can lead to reasonably good functional outcome despite expected orbital and periocular complications.

Orbital exenteration: an updated review with perspectives

Orbital exenteration is a radical and disfiguring surgery mainly performed in specialized tertiary care centers. Orbital exenteration has long been considered the treatment of choice for managing periocular tumors invading the orbit or primary orbital malignancies. Over the past decades, attention has been directed toward reducing the perioperative morbidity by developing new surgical devices and new strategies and promoting cosmetic rehabilitation by providing adequate facial prostheses. Despite these advances, several studies have questioned the role of orbital exenteration in improving overall survival. The last decade has been marked by the emergence of a new paradigm: the "eye-sparing" strategies based on conservative surgery with or without adjuvant radiotherapy and/or targeted therapies and immunotherapies. We summarize the data on orbital exenteration, including epidemiology, etiologies, use of surgical ablative and reconstructive techniques, complications, outcomes, and the related controversies.

Sinonasal cancer encroaching the orbit: Ablation or preservation?

BACKGROUND

Encroachment on the orbital cavity represents a challenge in the management of sinonasal cancer. Criteria guiding orbital preservation lack univocal consensus. Stage of orbital involvement is best assessed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

Patients affected by orbit-encroaching sinonasal cancer with available preoperative MRI, receiving surgery-based treatment at the University of Brescia between May 2005 and October 2018 were included. All cases were reviewed by expert radiologists and pathologists. Diagnostic performance of MRI was calculated using pathological information as reference. Survival analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The study included 123 patients. The orbit was abutted in 53 (43.1%) patients, whereas orbital invasion reached the periorbit in 18 (14.6%), extraconal fat and/or medial lacrimal sac in 29 (23.6%), extrinsic ocular muscles in 7 (5.7%), intraconal compartment in 4 (3.3%), and orbital apex in 12 (9.8%). Seventy-six (61.8%) patients received orbit-sparing surgery, 47 (38.2%) underwent orbital ablation (OA). Accuracy of MRI in detecting involvement by cancer was ≥80.0% for the orbital wall, extraconal fat, and muscles, and <80.0% for the periorbit and intraconal compartment. Previous surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and perineural invasion decreased MRI accuracy. Age, histology, tumor grade, pT category, N status, perineural invasion, orbital invasion stage, and need for OA were found to affect prognosis. Five-year orbital dysfunction-free survival was 92.8%.

CONCLUSION

Conservative management of sinonasal cancers encroaching the orbit is feasible. MRI is essential to preoperatively stage orbital invasion, yet with some limitation. Given the dismal prognosis despite aggressive surgery, neoadjuvant non-surgical therapies should be considered in patients requiring OA.

Sinonasal Malignancy and Orbital Exenteration Sparing Cancer Surgery

This article reviews the most common locations and natural history of sinonasal carcinomas. It also reviews surgical indications and current evidence regarding adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies. In the past, orbital clearance was generally done for ethmoid and maxillary cancers, even without a marked neoplastic infiltration; however, such indications have changed in the recent years due to advances in our understanding of the disease, as well as new chemotherapeutic and radiotherapy protocols. Surgical resection of tumors close to the orbit exhibits the challenging task of balancing treatment goals and patient's desires.

Ophthalmic and orbital considerations in the evaluation of skull base malignancies

INTRODUCTION

The orbital contents, afferent and efferent visual pathways, and the cranial nerves involved in eye movement, corneal sensation and eyelid closure traverse the skull base, a region bounded by the intracranial cavity, the paranasal sinuses, and the deep spaces of the face and head. As such, tumors from above or below have potential to affect some aspect of the visual system.

METHODS

We discuss here the clinical ophthalmologic and orbital considerations in the evaluation of patients with these tumors, as well as the ophthalmic sequelae of treatment with radiation or surgery (or both). And for the surgeon, we discuss the ophthalmic and orbital considerations in surgical planning, the role of the orbital surgeon in skull base surgery, and briefly discuss transorbital approaches to the skull base.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Ophthalmic and orbital dysfunction may be the main source of disability in patients with skull base malignancy; it is thus incumbent on those who manage patients with tumors of this region to be aware of the ophthalmic, neuro-ophthalmic and orbital manifestations, so as to best tailor therapy and monitor treatment outcomes.

Orbital exenteration and conjunctival melanoma: a 14-year study at the Jules Gonin Eye Hospital

Purpose

To report our 14-year experience with orbital exenteration and assess risk factors for poor prognosis by focusing on conjunctival melanoma.

Patients and method

A retrospective study was conducted in our tertiary care centre (Jules Gonin Eye Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland) between 2003 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients aged  ≥18 years with a follow-up >12 months, without metastatic spread at the time of surgery. Data recorded were age, gender, tumour histology, surgical technique, postoperative complications, surgical margin status, local recurrence, postoperative radiation beam therapy and metastatic status.

Results

Twenty-five patients with a mean age of 63.2 years (38–92) were included. Conjunctival melanoma was the most frequently identified tumour (n = 14, 56%) followed by conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma (n = 4, 16%), sebaceous carcinoma (n = 3, 12%), choroidal melanoma (n = 2, 8%) and basal cell carcinoma (n = 2, 8%). Eighteen tumours (72%) originated from the conjunctival tissue. Clear surgical margins were achieved in 21 (84%) patients. Fourteen (56%) patients experienced distant metastases and died from metastatic spread after a mean follow-up of 52.3 months (6–120). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) was 96%, 72% and 60%, respectively. In the univariate analysis, positive surgical margins, local recurrence and metachronous metastases were associated with a decreased OS (p = 0.002, p = 0.005 and p = 0.007, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, positive surgical margins and metachronous metastases were also associated with a decreased OS (p = 0.02 and p = 0.042, respectively). Conjunctival melanoma was not associated with a poorer prognosis (p = 0.280).

Conclusion

Free surgical margins are needed to increase OS. To achieve clearer surgical margins, neoadjuvant targeted therapies/immunotherapies may be considered.

[Does orbital exenteration still has a place in 2019?]

INTRODUCTION

Orbital exenteration is a radical anatomically and psychologically disfiguring procedure. It is mostly performed for management of orbital cancers or cancers with orbital involvement. The lack of benefit in terms of overall survival and the development of new molecular therapies (targeted therapies, immunotherapy) in recent years leads us to question its use. The goal of our review is to answer to the following question: is orbital exenteration a viable procedure in 2019?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed using the PUBMED and MEDLINE databases. The following terms were used then crossed with each other: "orbital exenteration", "exenterated socket", "overall survival", "life expectancy", "orbital reconstruction", "socket reconstruction". Oncology articles from the past 15 years were included and separated into those in the oculoplastic literature and those in the ENT literature.

RESULTS

Nineteen articles were included in this review. Eyelid tumours represent the main etiology of orbital exenteration. Basal cell carcinoma is the most frequently incriminated tumor, while sebaceous carcinoma and conjunctival squamous cell carcinoma are the most frequently encountered in Asian series. Non-conservative orbital exenteration is the most prevalent surgery performed. Orbital reconstruction depends on the surgeon's speciality: healing by secondary intention and split thickness skin grafts are mostly performed by oculoplastic surgeons, whereas regional or free flaps are mostly performed by ENT surgeons. Cerebrospinal fluid leakage is the most common intraoperative complication, encountered in 0 to 13 % of cases. The most common postoperative complications are ethmoid fistula and infection of the operative site, encountered in 0 to 50 % and 0 to 43 % of cases respectively. Orbital exenteration allows surgical resection of R0 tumors in 42.5 % to 97 % of cases. Overall survival following orbital exenteration is 83 % (50.5-97) and 65 % (37-92) at 1 and 5 years respectively. Identified risk factors for poor overall survival are: age, tumor histology (worse prognosis with choroidal melanoma, better prognosis with basal cell carcinoma), non-R0 surgical resection, locally advanced tumors (size>20mm, BCVA<20/400 and the presence of metastases at diagnosis). Recent studies have demonstrated favorable outcomes when managing locally advanced basal cell carcinoma, lacrimal gland cancer and conjunctival melanoma with targeted therapies or immunotherapies without performing orbital exenteration.

CONCLUSION

Orbital exenteration remains a major part of our therapeutic arsenal. Although orbital exenteration has failed to demonstrate any overall survival benefit, it allows satisfactory local control of the disease with an increasingly less invasive procedure. The development of targeted therapies and immunotherapies may change our therapeutic decisions in the future.

Prospective Evaluation of Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Anterolateral Craniofacial Resection with Orbital Exenteration

Objective  This study was aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life in patients undergoing anterolateral craniofacial resection (AL-CFR) with orbital exenteration (OE) for malignant skull base tumors and to investigate the effects of early psychiatric intervention. Design  Present study is a prospective, observational study. Setting  The study took place at the hospital department. Participants  Twenty-six consecutive patients were selected who underwent AL-CFR with OE at our hospital between 2005 and 2015. Main Outcome Measures  Health-related quality of life was assessed preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and medical outcomes study 8-items Short Form health survey (SF-8). In all cases, psychiatric intervention was organized by the consultation liaison psychiatry team preoperatively and postoperatively. Results  Ten (38.0%) of the 26 patients died and 16 (62.0%) were alive and disease-free at the end of the study. The 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 64.9% and 53.3%, respectively. Twenty-one patients (80.8%) developed psychiatric complications after surgery and needed treatment with psychotropic medication. Before surgery, 28% of patients had HADS scores ≥8 for anxiety and 20% had scores ≥8 for depression. Seven of the eight items in the SF-8 were significantly lower than those for the general Japanese population. However, scores for all the SF-8 items gradually improved during postoperative follow-up, reaching approximately 50 points, which is the national standard value, at 2 years after surgery. Conclusions  Craniofacial resection with OE was feasible and well tolerated in patients with malignant skull base tumors who received early psychiatric intervention to decrease the considerable psychological impact of this procedure.

[Tumors of the paranasal sinus invading the orbit]

Invasion of the orbit by tumors of the paranasal sinus represents an advanced state of disease. Prognosis has hardly improved in recent decades, despite multimodal therapeutic approaches. Complete resection of the tumor still remains the most promising therapy. Orbital exenteration implies a dramatic event for the patient's psyche and quality of life. If the eye that would have to be exenterated is the only one remaining with sufficient vision, exenteration should be abandoned in consensus with the patient. Aesthetic improvements following exenteration can be achieved by surgical and prosthetic techniques. The method of prosthesis fixation needs to be determined with respect to the patients' individual expectations and manual abilities. The main aspects of functional rehabilitation are good local cleanability and sufficient nasal breathing without encrusted mucus, which can be achieved by restoring the natural laminar airflow. Tumors of the paranasal sinus with orbital invasion represent a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The information regarding prognosis, therapeutic approaches, post-therapeutic quality of life, and rehabilitation options should be thoroughly discussed by patients and therapists prior to treatment.

[Management and complications of tumor resections of the midface]

Only about 8% of head and neck tumors affect the midface. This anatomical area is characterized by an enormous number of functionally important structures, and it is frequently only possible to achieve small resection margin distances. To avoid complications and unfavorable results, a dedicated preparation of both patient and surgeon is warranted. This review aims to provide encouragement for the postgraduate training of interested ENT specialists. Following the clinical course and based on recent literature, strategies to avoid complications of tumor surgery to the midface are given.

Multidisciplinary treatment algorithm for the management of sinonasal cancers with orbital invasion: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Sinonasal cancers frequently involve the orbit with resulting controversies on whether to remove or preserve the orbital contents.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients with primary sinonasal cancer involving the orbit, treated according to a multidisciplinary protocol tailored to tumor histology and extent of orbital invasion in two tertiary care referral centers over a 20-year period.

RESULTS

The oncological and functional outcomes of 163 patients were analyzed. The degree of orbital involvement significantly affected both overall (P < .0001) and disease-free (P < .0001) survival. Orbital apex invasion was an independent negative prognostic factor (5-year overall survival, 14.6% ± 7.5%), with dismal prognosis regardless of the treatment adopted. An appropriate use of induction chemotherapy and endoscopic-assisted surgery allowed for orbital preservation in 76.6% of cases; 96% of patients treated using an orbit-sparing approach maintained a functional eye after treatment.

CONCLUSION

The multimodal treatment algorithm herein proposed was able to maximize orbital preservation rates with acceptable oncological and functional outcomes.

AHNS Series: Do you know your guidelines? Principles for treatment of cancer of the paranasal sinuses: A review of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines

This article is a continuation of the "Do You Know Your Guidelines" series. This was launched as an initiative of the American Head and Neck Society to increase the awareness of current best practices pertaining to head and neck cancer. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for managing cancer of the paranasal sinuses are reviewed in a systematic fashion. These guidelines outline the workup, treatment, and surveillance of patients with cancer of the maxillary and ethmoid sinuses.

The Impact of Histologic Phenotype in the Treatment of Sinonasal Cancer

The management of sinonasal cancer is a challenge due to its low occurrence and anatomical and significant diversity of histological types. The therapeutic modality used should be tailored individually according to the histology, tumour stage, molecular profile and previous treatments. The clinical management of sinonasal cancer has improved greatly owing to developments in endoscopic surgery and precision radiotherapy. Complete surgical resection is the mainstay of sinonasal malignancies' management but multimodality therapy is associated with improved outcomes in certain histologies. The recognition of various histological types with biological behaviours more suitable for non-surgical modalities has allowed treatment protocols to become more tailored to the disease. In this review we aim to describe and to summarise the current data guiding the management of sinonasal cancer with emphasis on phenotypic variation.

Indications for open procedures in the endoscopic era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endoscopic sinus surgery became the gold standard in inflammatory disorders of the nose and paranasal sinuses, in cerebrospinal fluid leak and epistaxis management, and established its efficacy in the oncology of the region. However, there are certain limitations which make an external approach mandatory. This article reviews the recent literature describing the cases where an open procedure is still indicated.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the evolution of endoscopic surgery external approaches are still indicated. Osteoplastic flap remains an option for the refractory inflammation of the frontal sinus. Benign and malignant tumours with lateral or superior extension, neurovascular involvement, and bony/soft tissue erosion usually require an external approach. Superior and lateral posterior wall defects of frontal sinus with cerebrospinal fluid leak may mandate an open procedure. Management of severe epistaxis may still necessitate in selected cases an external approach when endoscopic surgery fails and embolization setting is not available.

SUMMARY

Although advances in endoscopic instrumentation and techniques steadily decrease the indications for external approaches, they continue to have a role in the management of nasal disorders. This study summarizes the recent literature and provides a comprehensive review of the up-to-date remaining indications for open procedures in the nose and paranasal sinuses.

The implications of orbital invasion in sinonasal tract malignancies

In recent decades, the management of sinonasal tumors abutting the orbit has been widely discussed. A real guideline has yet to be proposed, as prospective randomized studies on this topic are very difficult to organize, given the relative rarity of this pathology, the wide spectrum of histologic patterns, and the different clinical behavior of tumors. Nevertheless, in recent years, a better assessment of tumor extension has been obtained thanks to the refinement of preoperative imaging tools and, therefore, more conservative approaches could be adopted, with no worsening of the oncological outcomes and, at the same time, with more attention given to the post-surgical quality of life. Currently, tumors that extend to the bony orbital walls with or without focal infiltration of the periorbit are amenable to orbital preservation. On the other hand, infiltration of extraocular muscles and neurovascular structures are an indication to orbital exenteration. The ideal surgical treatment in cases of limited involvement of orbital fat still remains a matter of debate. We report and discuss the recent English literature on this interesting topic.

Sinonasal Malignancies of Anterior Skull Base: Histology-driven Treatment Strategies

The advances in endoscopy have revolutionized the management of sinonasal and skull base lesions. Many complex cancers that traditionally required open approaches are now amenable to purely endoscopic endonasal resection, providing less invasive surgery with lower morbidity but with comparable oncologic outcomes in terms of survival rates. This article discusses the current evidence for the multimodal management of sinonasal and anterior skull base cancers focusing on the different treatment protocols driven by histologic subtypes.

Organ preservation with neoadjuvant chemoradiation in patients with orbit invasive sinonasal cancer otherwise requiring exenteration

Purpose

We sought to determine if organ preservation (OP) with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) was feasible in patients with sinonasal cancer determined to require exenteration.

Materials and Methods

Twenty patients were determined to require exenteration for definitive treatment from 2005 to 2014. Fourteen patients underwent OP and 6 patients received exenteration with adjuvant CRT. Exenteration free survival (EFS), locoregional control (LRC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated.

Results

Five patients (36%) receiving OP had complete disease response at time of surgery. With a median follow-up of 18.8 months, EFS was 62% at 2 years for patients undergoing OP. At 2 years, there were no significant differences in LRC, PFS or OS (all all p > 0.050) between the groups. Less grade 3 or greater toxicity was seen in patients undergoing OP (p = 0.003). Visual function was preserved in all patients undergoing OP.

Conclusion

For patients with sinonasal cancer, OP may avoid exenteration, offering similar disease control and improved toxicity.

Orbital Exenteration to Manage Infiltrative Sinonasal, Orbital Adnexal, and Cutaneous Malignancies Provides Acceptable Survival Outcomes: An Institutional Review, Literature Review, and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Orbital exenteration (OE) is an aggressive operative undertaking that results in a disfiguring and dysfunctional outcome for patients. The purpose of our study was to determine the survival outcome for patients who underwent OE for malignant disease that had invaded the orbit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an ambispective cohort study based on a review of the records of 31 consecutive patients who had undergone OE within John Hunter Hospital. The study period was 2006 to 2013. The predictor variables were the demographic, tumor site, and clinicopathologic characteristics that might influence survival. The secondary outcome variable was survival. Descriptive statistics were calculated for the categorical and continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier estimates of the survival distribution were plotted. We also performed a review of published studies and a meta-analysis to investigate the nature of OE performed by various surgical disciplines.

RESULTS

Of the 31 patients included in the present study, 24 were men and 7 were women. The mean age was 65 years. Of the 31 cases, 15 were squamous cell carcinoma, 8 were basal cell carcinoma, and 8 were a mixture of other pathologic types. The time to median (50%) survival for all patients was 78.4 months. The 1-year survival rate was 93.4% and the 5-year survival rate was 54.1%. Although not statistically significant, notable differences were found in the interval to death with respect to the identification of perineural invasion, lymphovascular invasion, and histopathologic features. The review of published studies suggested a difference in the histologic features and location of the disorder treated, the extent of OE undertaken, and the method of reconstruction between the ophthalmology and nonophthalmology surgical disciplines.

CONCLUSIONS

Although OE results in significant disfigurement and dysfunction, it does provide good survival outcomes, given the extent of disease at presentation, evident in our group of patients. Continuation of the study, with greater numbers of patients, will serve to increase the statistical power of our observations.