Microvascular reconstruction of head and neck defects in the elderly

Treatment of elderly patients with head and neck cancer in an aging society: Focus on geriatric assessment and surgical treatment

Previous studies of the treatment of elderly head and neck cancer (HNC) patients were very limited and sometimes controversial. Although conclusions differ across various reports, it is often concluded that advanced chronological age does not directly affect prognosis, but that comorbidities and declines in physical and cognitive functions promote the occurrence of adverse events, especially with surgical treatment. Geriatric assessment (GA) and its screening tools are keys to help us understand overall health status and problems, predict life expectancy and treatment tolerance, and to influence treatment choices and interventions to improve treatment compliance. In addition, personal beliefs and values play a large role in determining policies for HNC treatment for elderly patients, and a multidisciplinary approach is important to support this. In this review, past research on HNC in older adults is presented, and the current evidence is explained, focusing on the management of elderly HNC patients, with an emphasis on the existing reports on each treatment stage and modality, especially the surgical procedures.

How age affects health-related-quality-of-life outcomes in maxillomandibular reconstructive surgery

INTRODUCTION

Maxillomandibular reconstruction has various functional, aesthetic, and psychosocial effects that can decrease patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The aim of this study was to compare HRQOL outcomes in older and younger patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction surgery between November 2008 and January 2021 was conducted. Participants completed the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module, M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Speech Handicap Index (SHI). Results from these instruments were used to compare HRQOL outcomes in old (≥70 years) and young (<70 years) patients.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients who underwent maxillomandibular reconstruction completed the instruments (response rate 50%), of which 33 (33%) were aged ≥70 years. Older age was associated with improved FACE-Q speaking (+11.3, P = 0.045), FACE-Q cancer worry (-9.97, P = 0.050), and SHI score (-16.6, P = 0.013). After adjusting for the effect of radiotherapy, age was associated with improved FACE-Q speaking (+16.8, P = 0.012), FACE-Q smiling distress (+12.6, P = 0.040), FACE-Q worry (-11.0, P = 0.032), and SHI scores (-18.4, P = 0.004). Older age was associated with an increased likelihood of postoperative complications (odds ratio (OR) = 2.9, P = 0.02) and medical complications (OR = 4.6, P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction, older age (≥70 years) was associated with better HRQOL outcomes in domains relating to speech and cancer worry. In all other HRQOL outcomes, the two age groups performed similarly.

Frailty as a predictor of adverse outcomes in head and neck reconstruction: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Frailty has been shown to adversely impact outcomes in a number of surgical disciplines. In head and neck reconstructive surgery, frailty may represent a significant risk factor in predicting post-operative outcomes due to the common characteristics of the patient population undergoing these procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the available evidence about frailty as a predictor of post-operative complications, length of hospital stay and quality of life in patients undergoing head and neck reconstructive surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

METHODS

The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO, registration CRD42022302899. Methodology was in keeping with the PRISMA Guidelines for Systematic Reviews. MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Web of Science and CENTRAL were the databases searched. Qualitative synthesis of the included studies was carried out, and quality assessment was performed.

RESULTS

Nine studies that reported data on 10,457 patients undergoing reconstruction of the head and neck were included in the review. A number of different tools were used to assess frailty, with the modified frailty index being the most frequently used. In total, 8 studies reported increased rates of complications in patients with increased levels of frailty, irrespective of the frailty tool used, with varied levels of statistical significance across the studies.

CONCLUSION

An association is observed between increased rates of perioperative complications and increased levels of frailty in patients undergoing head and neck reconstruction. Frailty tools may represent a useful method to risk stratify patients undergoing reconstructive head and neck surgery.

Designing an evidence‐based free‐flap pathway in head and neck reconstruction

Background

The use of autologous free‐tissue transfer is an increasingly utilized tool in the ladder of reconstructive options to preserve and restore function in patients with head and neck cancer. This article focuses on the evidence surrounding perioperative care that optimizes surgical outcomes and describes one tertiary center's approach to standardized free‐flap care.

Data Sources

This article examines English literature from PubMed and offers expert opinion on perioperative free‐flap care for head and neck oncology.

Conclusion

Free‐flap reconstruction for head and neck cancer is a process that, while individualized for each patient, is best supported by a comprehensive and standardized care pathway. Surgical optimization begins in the preoperative phase and a thoughtful approach to intraprofessional communication and evidence‐based practice is rewarded with improved outcomes.