Novel Strategies for Managing Retropharyngeal Lymph Node Metastases in Head and Neck and Thyroid Cancer with Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS)

Quality of life outcomes comparing primary Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) with primary radiotherapy for early-stage oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) and radiotherapy are considered oncologically equivalent primary treatment options for early-stage HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are therefore imperative in supporting clinical decision-making and optimising patient-centred care. The aim of this article is to evaluate how these primary treatment modalities compare in terms of QoL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing primary TORS and primary radiotherapy for OPSCC using validated QoL tools. Swallowing and global QoL were the primary endpoints with secondary endpoints including all other QoL domains. An inverse variance random-effects model was employed to calculate the weighted estimate of the treatment effects across trials.

RESULTS

A total of six studies collectively reporting on 555 patients were included (n = 236 TORS and n = 319 radiotherapy). Meta-analysis showed no significant difference for swallowing (mean difference = -0.24, p = 0.89) and global QoL (mean difference = 4.55, p = 0.14). For the remaining QoL domains (neck/shoulder impairment, neurotoxicity, voice, xerostomia, speech, and distress), the scarcity of data did not permit meta-analysis. However, the existing data showed no significant difference for any except for xerostomia where TORS appears favourable in the sole study reporting on this.

CONCLUSIONS

TORS and radiotherapy appear to be comparable primary treatment options for early stage OPSCC when it comes to QoL. However, a substantial proportion of patients in the TORS group received adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy rendering it difficult to establish the 'true' QoL outcomes following surgery alone. There are also minimal studies reporting QoL outcomes beyond swallowing and global QoL. Further research is therefore needed, including more randomised trials adequately powered to detect differences in QoL outcomes.

Recent advances in head and neck surgical oncology

In recent years, the field of head and neck oncology has witnessed a remarkable transformation with unprecedented advances that have revolutionized the management of complex tumors in this region. As an intricate subspecialty within oncology, head and neck surgical procedures demand detailed knowledge of the complex anatomy meticulous precision in surgical technique, and expertise to preserve vital functions while ensuring optimal oncological outcomes. With the relentless pursuit of improved patient outcomes, the integration of innovative technologies has significantly enhanced the surgical armamentarium. Robotics, endoscopic platforms, and image-guided navigation have revolutionized the surgical approach, enabling precise tumor resection and sparing healthy tissues. Furthermore, the application of advanced imaging modalities and molecular biomarker profiling has opened new avenues for personalized treatment strategies. From targeted therapies and immunotherapies to adaptive radiation techniques, clinicians are now equipped with an array of tailored options, ushering in a new era of personalized care for patients with head and neck malignancies. This article delves into the unfolding narratives of clinical triumphs, exploring the transformative potential of emerging therapies and the collaborative efforts propelling head and neck surgical oncology toward a future of hope and healing.

A systematic review of full economic evaluations of robotic-assisted surgery in thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial.