Surgical Management Patterns of Sinonasal Malignancy: A Population-Based Study

Surgical therapy in advanced sinonasal carcinomas - retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Sinonasal tumors are a rare and heterogeneous group of malignant tumors with different histopathological characteristics and clinical presentation. These tumors are usually treated through surgery. The aim of this study is to present our results of surgical therapy in patients with an advanced sinonasal tumor.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with an advanced sinonasal tumor who were surgically treated. The surgical technique combined both a frontal transbasal approach together with an endoscopic endonasal approach. The parameters used for evaluation were the histological type of tumor, the radicality of resection (complete vs. incomplete), the frequency of recurrence, the surgical and postoperative complications, the type of subsequent oncological therapy and the overall survival.

RESULTS

The group consisted of ten patients seven were men and three were women. Complete resection (defined as R0) was achieved in 8 (80%) of the cases, subcomplete resection was achieved in 2 (20%) of the cases. The overall survival period was 28.7 months (95% confidence interval 15.9-41.6).

CONCLUSION

The combination of the frontal transbasal approach with the endoscopic endonasal approach is a suitable surgical strategy that enables easier achievement of complete tumor resection, reconstruction of the anterior skull base and reduces the need for extensive surgical approaches.

Comparative Outcomes by Surgical Approach in Patients with Malignant Sinonasal Disease

Objective There is a paucity of data on comparative outcomes for open versus endoscopic surgery for patients with malignant sinonasal pathology. Most of the available studies are limited by a sample size <100 patients.

Design This is a retrospective cohort study.

Setting The findings of this study come from a single-institution tertiary care center from 2008 to 2019.

Participants In total, 199 patients who underwent surgery for malignant sinonasal disease participated in this study.

Main Outcome Measures The main outcome measures were perioperative complications and reoperation.

Results Patients in our sample had a mean age of 59.7 years (SD, 20.4). In total, 62% were male and 72% were white. An endoscopic-only approach was used in 41% of patients and an open or combined approach in 59% of patients. Squamous cell carcinoma was the most common pathology (43.0%), followed by sarcoma (9.5%), skin cancer (6.5%), sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (6.5%), and adenocarcinoma (5.5%). The all-cause complication rate was 14.6%. Patients with an open resection had a higher rate of intraoperative complications (5.9 vs. 0%; p = 0.043), postoperative complications (19.5 vs. 3.7%; p = 0.001), and all-cause complications (21.0 vs. 3.7%; p < 0.001). The likelihood of early reoperation (<6 months) or late reoperation (>6 months) did not significantly differ by surgical approach (p = 1.000 and 0.741, respectively).

Conclusion The endoscopic approach for resection of malignant sinonasal disease is viable for select patients and may be associated with a favorable complication rate compared with the open approach.

The Selective Role of Open and Endoscopic Approaches for Sinonasal Malignant Tumours

Endoscopic endonasal surgery has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of selected cases of sinonasal cancers. However, in cases of locally advanced neoplasms, as well as recurrences, the most appropriate approach is still debated. The present review aims to summarize the current state of knowledge on the utility of open approaches to resect sinonasal malignant tumours. Published comparative studies and meta-analyses suggest comparable oncological results with lower morbidity for the endoscopic approaches, but selection biases cannot be excluded. After a critical analysis of the available literature, it can be concluded that endoscopic surgery for selected lesions allows for oncologically safe resections with decreased morbidity. However, when endoscopic endonasal surgery is contraindicated and definitive chemoradiotherapy is not appropriate, craniofacial and transfacial approaches remain the best therapeutic option.

Management of sinonasal cancers: Survey of UK practice and literature overview

INTRODUCTION

Sinonasal malignancy is a rare and heterogenous disease, with limited evidence to guide management. This report summarises the findings of a UK survey and expert workshop discussion which took place to inform design of a proposed UK trial to assess proton beam therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

METHOD

A multidisciplinary working group constructed an online survey to assess current approaches within the UK to surgical and non-surgical practice. Head and neck clinical oncologists, ear nose and throat (ENT) and oral-maxillofacial (OMF) surgeons were invited to participate in the 42-question survey in September 2020. The Royal College of Radiologists Consensus model was adopted in establishing categories to indicate strength of response. An expert panel conducted a virtual workshop in November 2020 to discuss areas of disagreement.

RESULTS

A survey was sent to 140 UK-based clinicians with 63 responses (45% response rate) from 30 centres, representing a broad geographical spread. Participants comprised 35 clinical oncologists (56%) and 29 surgeons (44%; 20 ENT and 9 OMF surgeons). There were variations in preferred sequence and combination of treatment modalities for locally advanced maxillary squamous cell carcinoma and sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma. There was discordant surgical management of the orbit, dura, and neck. There was lack of consensus for radiotherapy in post-operative dose fractionation, target volume delineation, use of multiple dose levels and treatment planning approach to organs-at-risk.

CONCLUSION

There was wide variation across UK centres in the management of sinonasal carcinomas. There is need to standardise UK practice and develop an evidence base for treatment.

Surgical Management of Sinonasal Cancers: A Comprehensive Review

Surgery plays an important role in the treatment of sinonasal cancer. Many surgical approaches have been described, including open, endoscopic, or combined approaches. The choice is based on several criteria: general criteria related to the oncological results and morbidity of each technique, specific criteria related to the tumor (tumor extensions, tumor pathology), the patient, or the surgeon himself. The aims of this review are (i) to provide a complete overview of the surgical techniques available for the management of sinonasal malignant tumors, with a special focus on recent developments in the field of transnasal endoscopic surgery; (ii) to summarize the criteria that lead to the choice of one technique over another. In particular, the oncological outcomes, the morbidity of the different techniques, and the specificities of each histologic subtype will be discussed based on a comprehensive literature review.

Outcomes of Primary Versus Salvage Surgery for Sinonasal Malignancies: A Population-Based Analysis

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

There exists a lack of consensus on the optimal sequence of treatment for many sinonasal malignancies (SNMs). This study compares the overall survival (OS) outcomes for primary surgery (PS) versus salvage surgery (SS) in SNM patients across stage, histology, and primary site.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective database review.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for all SNM cases treated with multimodal surgical and nonsurgical therapy between 2004 and 2015. Logistic regression identified predictors of SS. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated predictors of mortality, and Kaplan-Meier log-rank test assessed OS outcomes.

RESULTS

Our SNM cohort consisted of 3,011 patients (PS = 2,804; SS = 207). SS patients had significantly longer postoperative hospital stays (P = .009) and increased rates of 30-day (P < .001) and 90-day mortality (P < .001) compared to PS. On multivariate logistic regression, predictors of undergoing SS included sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma histology (odds ratio = 2.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-6.66; P = .024). On multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses among SS patients, late-stage disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.80; 95% CI: 1.46-15.8; P = .01) and positive surgical margins (HR = 2.31; 95% CI: 1.29-4.13; P = .005) portended significantly worse OS. In the propensity score-matched cohort controlling for stage and histology, PS had significantly improved OS compared to SS (P = .007). Compared to SS, PS also had improved OS in subgroup analyses for patients with late-stage disease (P = .026) and squamous cell carcinoma histology (P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

In our SMN cohort, PS resulted in improved OS outcomes compared to SS independent of stage and histology. Consideration may be given to primary surgical resection for SMN whenever feasible, though a targeted, individualized approach is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 131:E710-E718, 2021.

Multimodal Therapy for Sinonasal Malignancies: Updates and Review of Current Treatment

OPINION STATEMENT

Sinonasal malignancies pose a significant challenge in management due to their low incidence, biologic diversity, and significant symptom burden. Even though surgery remains the primary therapeutic modality, a multi-modality approach has been shown to benefit a significant proportion of patients and its success depends largely on stage and histologic type. Non-surgical approaches such as novel radiation approaches as well as intensification with systemic therapy hold promise in altering the organ preservation rate as well as overall survival for patients. Practice changing randomized trials to test these novel modalities are overdue and desperately needed.

Margins in Sinonasal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Predictors, Outcomes, and the Endoscopic Approach

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors associated with positive margins following surgical management of sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SNSCC), especially with regard to endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of adult patients with clinically staged tumor (T)1 to T4a SNSCC within the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2014, factors were associated with positive margins using multivariable binary logistic regression. Cases from 2010 to 2014 had surgical approach (open vs. endoscopic) available and were analyzed in a subgroup to assess the association of surgical approach with margin status. The association of margin status with overall survival (OS) and additional therapy administration was also assessed.

RESULTS

We identified 2,968 cases, of which 807 (27.2%) had positive margins. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with positive margins included higher T stage (T4a vs. T1: odds ratio [OR] 2.768 [95% CI 2.143-3.577]), less differentiated tumors (poorly differentiated vs. well differentiated: OR 1.403 [95% CI 1.060-1.856]), and tumors in the ethmoid sinus (vs. nasal cavity; OR 1.889 [95% CI 1.305-2.734]). Cases treated at higher volume facilities (HVFs) were associated with a lower likelihood of positive margins (OR 0.716 [95% CI 0.582-0.881]). Positive margins were associated with decreased OS (hazard ratio 1.672 [95% CI 1.464-1.908]) and an increased rate of additional therapy (OR 1.966 [95% confidence interval 1.597-2.421]). An endoscopic approach was not associated with an increased likelihood of obtaining positive margins (vs. open; OR 1.151 [0.903-1.651]).

CONCLUSION

Positive margins were less likely when performed at HVFs and more likely in the ethmoid sinus than other subsites. Importantly, there was no association between positive margins and surgical approach. Endoscopic surgery may offer a safe, less invasive alternative to open surgery for select patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 130:E388-E396, 2020.