American Head & Neck Society (AHNS): International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer

SEATTLE – A longer course of dexamethasone was a bit better than the usual single intraoperative dose for controlling pain and dysphagia after transoral robotic surgery in a randomized trial from the Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

Thirty-five subjects were randomized to the standard 10-mg intraoperative dexamethasone dose plus 8 mg every 8 hours for up to 4 days; 33 others were randomized to the intraoperative dose plus placebo. All the subjects had transoral robotic surgery (TORS) resection for T1 or T2 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, either partial pharyngectomy/radical tonsillectomy, base of tongue resection, or both.

The dexamethasone group had significantly less pain on postop day 3 (about 1.5 points less on the 10-point visual analogue scale) and were discharged, on average, a day earlier. They also advanced more quickly toward solid food at 1- and 3-weeks’ follow-up. “They were much more likely to be on a full-soft diet, while the placebo group was mostly still on purees, and just starting into soft foods,” said lead investigator Daniel Clayburgh, MD, a head and neck cancer specialist at the university.

Otherwise, however, the extra dexamethasone wasn’t much help; pain scores were the same in both groups for the first couple days after surgery and at follow-up, and both groups used the same amount of post-op opioids. Other than food tolerance, dysphagia metrics were pretty much the same.

“I was actually anticipating a little bit more of a benefit, but there are potentially some benefits to extended corticosteroid courses after TORS. It’s safe, and well tolerated so long as you screen out diabetes and other problems with hyperglycemia,” as was done in the study, he said. “It does decrease post-op length of stay and may provide a modest decrease in post-op pain, and may slightly accelerate advancement of dietary consistency,” Dr. Clayburgh said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Although he and his colleagues are mulling over what to do with the findings in light of other initiatives to reduce post-TORS pain, they are now likely to extend dexamethasone courses when significant post-op pain seems likely, and doing so is not otherwise contraindicated, he said.

Intraoperative corticosteroids are now routine for TORS, based on the strength of benefit in the tonsillectomy literature. The team decided to try an extended course because “being rather simple minded surgeons, we thought that if one dose is good, more should be better,” Dr. Clayburgh said.

The dexamethasone group was slightly younger than the placebo group (56 vs. 61 years) but otherwise similar; most were men. In addition to patients with hyperglycemia issues, those with confounders for post-op speech and swallowing recovery were among those excluded from the trial. Subjects required nasogastric feeding tubes for a median of 6.5 days postoperatively, lost a mean of 10 pounds in the first 2 post-op weeks, and were hospitalized for a mean of about 5 days. Dexamethasone was delivered orally or by nasogastric tube.

There was no external funding for the study, and Dr. Clayburgh had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – A longer course of dexamethasone was a bit better than the usual single intraoperative dose for controlling pain and dysphagia after transoral robotic surgery in a randomized trial from the Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

Thirty-five subjects were randomized to the standard 10-mg intraoperative dexamethasone dose plus 8 mg every 8 hours for up to 4 days; 33 others were randomized to the intraoperative dose plus placebo. All the subjects had transoral robotic surgery (TORS) resection for T1 or T2 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, either partial pharyngectomy/radical tonsillectomy, base of tongue resection, or both.

The dexamethasone group had significantly less pain on postop day 3 (about 1.5 points less on the 10-point visual analogue scale) and were discharged, on average, a day earlier. They also advanced more quickly toward solid food at 1- and 3-weeks’ follow-up. “They were much more likely to be on a full-soft diet, while the placebo group was mostly still on purees, and just starting into soft foods,” said lead investigator Daniel Clayburgh, MD, a head and neck cancer specialist at the university.

Otherwise, however, the extra dexamethasone wasn’t much help; pain scores were the same in both groups for the first couple days after surgery and at follow-up, and both groups used the same amount of post-op opioids. Other than food tolerance, dysphagia metrics were pretty much the same.

“I was actually anticipating a little bit more of a benefit, but there are potentially some benefits to extended corticosteroid courses after TORS. It’s safe, and well tolerated so long as you screen out diabetes and other problems with hyperglycemia,” as was done in the study, he said. “It does decrease post-op length of stay and may provide a modest decrease in post-op pain, and may slightly accelerate advancement of dietary consistency,” Dr. Clayburgh said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Although he and his colleagues are mulling over what to do with the findings in light of other initiatives to reduce post-TORS pain, they are now likely to extend dexamethasone courses when significant post-op pain seems likely, and doing so is not otherwise contraindicated, he said.

Intraoperative corticosteroids are now routine for TORS, based on the strength of benefit in the tonsillectomy literature. The team decided to try an extended course because “being rather simple minded surgeons, we thought that if one dose is good, more should be better,” Dr. Clayburgh said.

The dexamethasone group was slightly younger than the placebo group (56 vs. 61 years) but otherwise similar; most were men. In addition to patients with hyperglycemia issues, those with confounders for post-op speech and swallowing recovery were among those excluded from the trial. Subjects required nasogastric feeding tubes for a median of 6.5 days postoperatively, lost a mean of 10 pounds in the first 2 post-op weeks, and were hospitalized for a mean of about 5 days. Dexamethasone was delivered orally or by nasogastric tube.

There was no external funding for the study, and Dr. Clayburgh had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – A longer course of dexamethasone was a bit better than the usual single intraoperative dose for controlling pain and dysphagia after transoral robotic surgery in a randomized trial from the Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.

Thirty-five subjects were randomized to the standard 10-mg intraoperative dexamethasone dose plus 8 mg every 8 hours for up to 4 days; 33 others were randomized to the intraoperative dose plus placebo. All the subjects had transoral robotic surgery (TORS) resection for T1 or T2 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, either partial pharyngectomy/radical tonsillectomy, base of tongue resection, or both.

The dexamethasone group had significantly less pain on postop day 3 (about 1.5 points less on the 10-point visual analogue scale) and were discharged, on average, a day earlier. They also advanced more quickly toward solid food at 1- and 3-weeks’ follow-up. “They were much more likely to be on a full-soft diet, while the placebo group was mostly still on purees, and just starting into soft foods,” said lead investigator Daniel Clayburgh, MD, a head and neck cancer specialist at the university.

Otherwise, however, the extra dexamethasone wasn’t much help; pain scores were the same in both groups for the first couple days after surgery and at follow-up, and both groups used the same amount of post-op opioids. Other than food tolerance, dysphagia metrics were pretty much the same.

“I was actually anticipating a little bit more of a benefit, but there are potentially some benefits to extended corticosteroid courses after TORS. It’s safe, and well tolerated so long as you screen out diabetes and other problems with hyperglycemia,” as was done in the study, he said. “It does decrease post-op length of stay and may provide a modest decrease in post-op pain, and may slightly accelerate advancement of dietary consistency,” Dr. Clayburgh said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Although he and his colleagues are mulling over what to do with the findings in light of other initiatives to reduce post-TORS pain, they are now likely to extend dexamethasone courses when significant post-op pain seems likely, and doing so is not otherwise contraindicated, he said.

Intraoperative corticosteroids are now routine for TORS, based on the strength of benefit in the tonsillectomy literature. The team decided to try an extended course because “being rather simple minded surgeons, we thought that if one dose is good, more should be better,” Dr. Clayburgh said.

The dexamethasone group was slightly younger than the placebo group (56 vs. 61 years) but otherwise similar; most were men. In addition to patients with hyperglycemia issues, those with confounders for post-op speech and swallowing recovery were among those excluded from the trial. Subjects required nasogastric feeding tubes for a median of 6.5 days postoperatively, lost a mean of 10 pounds in the first 2 post-op weeks, and were hospitalized for a mean of about 5 days. Dexamethasone was delivered orally or by nasogastric tube.

There was no external funding for the study, and Dr. Clayburgh had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Additional resection to clear positive frozen tumor bed margins in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma – a common practice in head and neck surgery – does not improve outcomes, investigators report.

In a retrospective review of 406 patients treated with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma resection, the difference in local recurrence between patients with positive intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins cleared by additional resection (local recurrence in 27%) and those with positive frozen margins that were not cleared (local recurrence in 34%) was not statistically significant.

The team assessed local recurrence rates after dividing their review subjects – 61 years old on average and over half men – into those with negative tumor and tumor bed margins; patients with one positive and the other negative; and patients with both margins positive. Tumor beds were cleared to negative when possible.

The various configurations mattered for prognosis. Local recurrence ranged from 7% when both margins were negative to 65% when both were positive. Cancer recurred in 19% of patients with negative tumor but positive bed margins, and 35% of patients with positive tumor but negative bed margins. “Combining margin groups provides additional prognostic information, [but] the main specimen margin was the strongest predictor of recurrence. Positive margins on the main specimen carry a poor prognosis,” said lead investigator Marisa Buchakjian, MD, at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The study “should influence the use and interpretation of margin data in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma surgery,” she said, since the majority of head and neck surgeons rely on tumor bed margins for prognosis, and consider positive tumor beds resected to clear pretty much the same as ones that are initially negative.

That approach is probably too simple. Intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins “were unreliable tests of main specimen margins, and would in fact be expected to miss approximately 50%” that are positive, said Dr. Buchakjian of University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City.

She and her associates concluded that “the concordance between tumor bed and tumor specimen margins is not good ... Cases of main specimen margin involvement with no corresponding findings in tumor bed frozen sections are common; conversely, frozen sections may show involvement, while the main specimen margins are negative. Prognostic information is contained within findings from both the frozen and specimen margins,” and neither should be considered the “true” margin. The tumor margin is an important predictor, even if margins are taken from the tumor bed.

However, “we do not believe that this provides evidence that a known positive margin should not be pursued with additional excision. We emphasize that this study highlights the prognostic importance of margin status and that an involved margin, either on the initial tumor bed frozen sections or the tumor specimen, is associated with worse outcomes regardless of the final margin result,” they said.

The authors had no conflicts of interest, and didn’t report external funding.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Additional resection to clear positive frozen tumor bed margins in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma – a common practice in head and neck surgery – does not improve outcomes, investigators report.

In a retrospective review of 406 patients treated with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma resection, the difference in local recurrence between patients with positive intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins cleared by additional resection (local recurrence in 27%) and those with positive frozen margins that were not cleared (local recurrence in 34%) was not statistically significant.

The team assessed local recurrence rates after dividing their review subjects – 61 years old on average and over half men – into those with negative tumor and tumor bed margins; patients with one positive and the other negative; and patients with both margins positive. Tumor beds were cleared to negative when possible.

The various configurations mattered for prognosis. Local recurrence ranged from 7% when both margins were negative to 65% when both were positive. Cancer recurred in 19% of patients with negative tumor but positive bed margins, and 35% of patients with positive tumor but negative bed margins. “Combining margin groups provides additional prognostic information, [but] the main specimen margin was the strongest predictor of recurrence. Positive margins on the main specimen carry a poor prognosis,” said lead investigator Marisa Buchakjian, MD, at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The study “should influence the use and interpretation of margin data in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma surgery,” she said, since the majority of head and neck surgeons rely on tumor bed margins for prognosis, and consider positive tumor beds resected to clear pretty much the same as ones that are initially negative.

That approach is probably too simple. Intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins “were unreliable tests of main specimen margins, and would in fact be expected to miss approximately 50%” that are positive, said Dr. Buchakjian of University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City.

She and her associates concluded that “the concordance between tumor bed and tumor specimen margins is not good ... Cases of main specimen margin involvement with no corresponding findings in tumor bed frozen sections are common; conversely, frozen sections may show involvement, while the main specimen margins are negative. Prognostic information is contained within findings from both the frozen and specimen margins,” and neither should be considered the “true” margin. The tumor margin is an important predictor, even if margins are taken from the tumor bed.

However, “we do not believe that this provides evidence that a known positive margin should not be pursued with additional excision. We emphasize that this study highlights the prognostic importance of margin status and that an involved margin, either on the initial tumor bed frozen sections or the tumor specimen, is associated with worse outcomes regardless of the final margin result,” they said.

The authors had no conflicts of interest, and didn’t report external funding.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Additional resection to clear positive frozen tumor bed margins in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma – a common practice in head and neck surgery – does not improve outcomes, investigators report.

In a retrospective review of 406 patients treated with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma resection, the difference in local recurrence between patients with positive intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins cleared by additional resection (local recurrence in 27%) and those with positive frozen margins that were not cleared (local recurrence in 34%) was not statistically significant.

The team assessed local recurrence rates after dividing their review subjects – 61 years old on average and over half men – into those with negative tumor and tumor bed margins; patients with one positive and the other negative; and patients with both margins positive. Tumor beds were cleared to negative when possible.

The various configurations mattered for prognosis. Local recurrence ranged from 7% when both margins were negative to 65% when both were positive. Cancer recurred in 19% of patients with negative tumor but positive bed margins, and 35% of patients with positive tumor but negative bed margins. “Combining margin groups provides additional prognostic information, [but] the main specimen margin was the strongest predictor of recurrence. Positive margins on the main specimen carry a poor prognosis,” said lead investigator Marisa Buchakjian, MD, at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The study “should influence the use and interpretation of margin data in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma surgery,” she said, since the majority of head and neck surgeons rely on tumor bed margins for prognosis, and consider positive tumor beds resected to clear pretty much the same as ones that are initially negative.

That approach is probably too simple. Intraoperative frozen tumor bed margins “were unreliable tests of main specimen margins, and would in fact be expected to miss approximately 50%” that are positive, said Dr. Buchakjian of University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City.

She and her associates concluded that “the concordance between tumor bed and tumor specimen margins is not good ... Cases of main specimen margin involvement with no corresponding findings in tumor bed frozen sections are common; conversely, frozen sections may show involvement, while the main specimen margins are negative. Prognostic information is contained within findings from both the frozen and specimen margins,” and neither should be considered the “true” margin. The tumor margin is an important predictor, even if margins are taken from the tumor bed.

However, “we do not believe that this provides evidence that a known positive margin should not be pursued with additional excision. We emphasize that this study highlights the prognostic importance of margin status and that an involved margin, either on the initial tumor bed frozen sections or the tumor specimen, is associated with worse outcomes regardless of the final margin result,” they said.

The authors had no conflicts of interest, and didn’t report external funding.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Oncologic transoral robotic surgery patients spend less time in the hospital if they have neck dissections at the same time, instead of later, according to a review of 441 patients by Stony Brook (N.Y.) University.

The average hospital length of stay (LOS) was 6 days for the 349 patients (79.1%) who had lymphadenectomy neck dissections at the same time as transoral robotic surgery (TORS). The 92 patients (20.9%) who had staged procedures - neck dissections and TORS about a month apart, with TORS usually done first - stayed in the hospital an average of 8 days (P less than .0001). After risk adjustment, LOS was 43% shorter for concurrent dissections.

Cardiac arrhythmias were also more common in staged patients, perhaps because they had general anesthesia twice in a short period or maybe because staged patients were more likely to be obese (18.5% vs. 7.5%; P less than .01).

However, there were no statistically significant outcome differences otherwise, and the investigators concluded that “concurrent and staged procedures are equally safe. It is therefore reasonable to allow operator preference and patient factors to determine surgical logistics.”

Neck dissection timing has been controversial since the advent of TORS several years ago, when surgeons and administrators realized they could fit more cases into the schedule by doing neck dissections, which can take a few hours, at a different time.

Proponents of the staged approach argue, among other things, that it reduces the risk of fistulas and tracheotomies, and allows surgeons a second go at positive margins. Advocates of concurrent procedures counter that fistulas, if found, can be repaired right away, and that same-time surgery saves money, allows for earlier adjuvant therapy, and cuts anesthesia risks.

There hasn’t been much data to settle the debate, and no one has compared LOS before, so it was “important” to look into the matter, lead investigator Catherine Frenkel, MD, a Stony Brook general surgery resident, said at the American Head and Neck Society International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer.

German investigators also recently concluded that it’s pretty much a draw between concurrent and staged dissections. In a study of 41 TORS cases, “the timing of neck dissection did not make a significant difference in the outcomes. We suggest, therefore, that aspiring and established TORS teams do not restrict their appropriate indications due to robotic slot and theatre time constraints, but perform each indicated TORS case as soon as possible within their given systems, even if the neck dissections cannot be done on the same day,” they said (Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 Jun;41[6]:773-8).

In addition to obese patients, those who had tongue or tonsil lesions were more likely to be staged in the Stony Brook analysis. About half of the surgeons in the study stuck solely to concurrent procedures, while a handful opted for the staged approach, and the rest did both. Perhaps not surprisingly, high-volume surgeons – those who did five or more TORS cases per year – were more likely to stage.

Almost two-thirds of patients had at least one complication, most commonly renal failure, heart problems, extended ventilation, and surgical errors, which included accidental punctures, postop fistulas, hemorrhages, and wound complications. A total of 13% of patients had at least one postop readmission. Apart from arrhythmias, there were no statistically significant differences in complication or 30-day readmission rates between concurrent and staged patients. High-volume surgeons were less likely to have complications.

Postop bleeding was another common problem, and more likely with staged surgeries (12% vs. 7%). Concurrent procedures had a slightly higher rate of new tracheotomies and gastrostomies, but again the differences were not statistically significant, even with pedicle and free-flap reconstruction. There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators had no relevant conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Oncologic transoral robotic surgery patients spend less time in the hospital if they have neck dissections at the same time, instead of later, according to a review of 441 patients by Stony Brook (N.Y.) University.

The average hospital length of stay (LOS) was 6 days for the 349 patients (79.1%) who had lymphadenectomy neck dissections at the same time as transoral robotic surgery (TORS). The 92 patients (20.9%) who had staged procedures - neck dissections and TORS about a month apart, with TORS usually done first - stayed in the hospital an average of 8 days (P less than .0001). After risk adjustment, LOS was 43% shorter for concurrent dissections.

Cardiac arrhythmias were also more common in staged patients, perhaps because they had general anesthesia twice in a short period or maybe because staged patients were more likely to be obese (18.5% vs. 7.5%; P less than .01).

However, there were no statistically significant outcome differences otherwise, and the investigators concluded that “concurrent and staged procedures are equally safe. It is therefore reasonable to allow operator preference and patient factors to determine surgical logistics.”

Neck dissection timing has been controversial since the advent of TORS several years ago, when surgeons and administrators realized they could fit more cases into the schedule by doing neck dissections, which can take a few hours, at a different time.

Proponents of the staged approach argue, among other things, that it reduces the risk of fistulas and tracheotomies, and allows surgeons a second go at positive margins. Advocates of concurrent procedures counter that fistulas, if found, can be repaired right away, and that same-time surgery saves money, allows for earlier adjuvant therapy, and cuts anesthesia risks.

There hasn’t been much data to settle the debate, and no one has compared LOS before, so it was “important” to look into the matter, lead investigator Catherine Frenkel, MD, a Stony Brook general surgery resident, said at the American Head and Neck Society International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer.

German investigators also recently concluded that it’s pretty much a draw between concurrent and staged dissections. In a study of 41 TORS cases, “the timing of neck dissection did not make a significant difference in the outcomes. We suggest, therefore, that aspiring and established TORS teams do not restrict their appropriate indications due to robotic slot and theatre time constraints, but perform each indicated TORS case as soon as possible within their given systems, even if the neck dissections cannot be done on the same day,” they said (Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 Jun;41[6]:773-8).

In addition to obese patients, those who had tongue or tonsil lesions were more likely to be staged in the Stony Brook analysis. About half of the surgeons in the study stuck solely to concurrent procedures, while a handful opted for the staged approach, and the rest did both. Perhaps not surprisingly, high-volume surgeons – those who did five or more TORS cases per year – were more likely to stage.

Almost two-thirds of patients had at least one complication, most commonly renal failure, heart problems, extended ventilation, and surgical errors, which included accidental punctures, postop fistulas, hemorrhages, and wound complications. A total of 13% of patients had at least one postop readmission. Apart from arrhythmias, there were no statistically significant differences in complication or 30-day readmission rates between concurrent and staged patients. High-volume surgeons were less likely to have complications.

Postop bleeding was another common problem, and more likely with staged surgeries (12% vs. 7%). Concurrent procedures had a slightly higher rate of new tracheotomies and gastrostomies, but again the differences were not statistically significant, even with pedicle and free-flap reconstruction. There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators had no relevant conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Oncologic transoral robotic surgery patients spend less time in the hospital if they have neck dissections at the same time, instead of later, according to a review of 441 patients by Stony Brook (N.Y.) University.

The average hospital length of stay (LOS) was 6 days for the 349 patients (79.1%) who had lymphadenectomy neck dissections at the same time as transoral robotic surgery (TORS). The 92 patients (20.9%) who had staged procedures - neck dissections and TORS about a month apart, with TORS usually done first - stayed in the hospital an average of 8 days (P less than .0001). After risk adjustment, LOS was 43% shorter for concurrent dissections.

Cardiac arrhythmias were also more common in staged patients, perhaps because they had general anesthesia twice in a short period or maybe because staged patients were more likely to be obese (18.5% vs. 7.5%; P less than .01).

However, there were no statistically significant outcome differences otherwise, and the investigators concluded that “concurrent and staged procedures are equally safe. It is therefore reasonable to allow operator preference and patient factors to determine surgical logistics.”

Neck dissection timing has been controversial since the advent of TORS several years ago, when surgeons and administrators realized they could fit more cases into the schedule by doing neck dissections, which can take a few hours, at a different time.

Proponents of the staged approach argue, among other things, that it reduces the risk of fistulas and tracheotomies, and allows surgeons a second go at positive margins. Advocates of concurrent procedures counter that fistulas, if found, can be repaired right away, and that same-time surgery saves money, allows for earlier adjuvant therapy, and cuts anesthesia risks.

There hasn’t been much data to settle the debate, and no one has compared LOS before, so it was “important” to look into the matter, lead investigator Catherine Frenkel, MD, a Stony Brook general surgery resident, said at the American Head and Neck Society International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer.

German investigators also recently concluded that it’s pretty much a draw between concurrent and staged dissections. In a study of 41 TORS cases, “the timing of neck dissection did not make a significant difference in the outcomes. We suggest, therefore, that aspiring and established TORS teams do not restrict their appropriate indications due to robotic slot and theatre time constraints, but perform each indicated TORS case as soon as possible within their given systems, even if the neck dissections cannot be done on the same day,” they said (Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015 Jun;41[6]:773-8).

In addition to obese patients, those who had tongue or tonsil lesions were more likely to be staged in the Stony Brook analysis. About half of the surgeons in the study stuck solely to concurrent procedures, while a handful opted for the staged approach, and the rest did both. Perhaps not surprisingly, high-volume surgeons – those who did five or more TORS cases per year – were more likely to stage.

Almost two-thirds of patients had at least one complication, most commonly renal failure, heart problems, extended ventilation, and surgical errors, which included accidental punctures, postop fistulas, hemorrhages, and wound complications. A total of 13% of patients had at least one postop readmission. Apart from arrhythmias, there were no statistically significant differences in complication or 30-day readmission rates between concurrent and staged patients. High-volume surgeons were less likely to have complications.

Postop bleeding was another common problem, and more likely with staged surgeries (12% vs. 7%). Concurrent procedures had a slightly higher rate of new tracheotomies and gastrostomies, but again the differences were not statistically significant, even with pedicle and free-flap reconstruction. There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators had no relevant conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – It’s better to place gastrostomy tubes before head and neck cancer surgery rather than after, according to a review of 184 patients.

The 73 patients in the study who got preoperative gastrostomy tubes (G-tubes) were sicker than the 111 who had G-tubes placed after surgery, with significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, lower body mass indexes, and greater likelihoods of having both prior radiation and more extensive resections requiring flap reconstructions. They were, overall, a higher-risk population with a greater potential for bad outcomes, which is why tubes were placed preemptively.

Even so, at 6 months, the total average cost for the preop G-tube group was $39,751 versus $48,999 for the postoperative group, a savings of $9,248 per patient. The difference was driven by inpatient savings; the preop group left the hospital an average of 3.2 days sooner than their postop G-tube peers (9.4 days versus 12.6 days; P less than .001). Readmissions and other postdischarge costs were similar between the two groups, as were wound and nonwound complications.

“This data suggests that preoperative placement of G-tubes is associated with lower total health care costs. It appears there’s a potential for health care cost savings if candidates for G-tubes can be identified” before surgery and the tubes placed preoperatively, said investigator Joshua Waltonen, MD, of Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.

That’s exactly what Wake Forest is doing now. Physicians there use a scoring system to determine how likely patients are to need G-tubes after surgery. If the risk is high, patients are counseled that putting one in beforehand is a good idea, he said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The team previously found that risk factors include, among others, supracricoid laryngectomy, prior radiation, flap reconstruction, tracheostomy placement, and preop dysphagia and weight loss (JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014 Dec;140[12]:1198-206).

Two factors probably account for the shorter lengths of stay, Dr. Waltonen said. First, patients with preop feeding tubes go into surgery with a nutritional boost, which helps with recovery. Also, with a preop tube, patients don’t have to wait for general surgery to get around to placing one postoperatively.

Both groups were about 60 years old on average. The mean body mass index of the preop group was 23 kg/m^{2 and} 26 kg/m^{2 in the postop group} (P = .009). Almost two-thirds of preop patients had prior radiation versus a quarter of postop patients (P less than .001). Tumor and nodal stages were similar.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Waltonen had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – It’s better to place gastrostomy tubes before head and neck cancer surgery rather than after, according to a review of 184 patients.

The 73 patients in the study who got preoperative gastrostomy tubes (G-tubes) were sicker than the 111 who had G-tubes placed after surgery, with significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, lower body mass indexes, and greater likelihoods of having both prior radiation and more extensive resections requiring flap reconstructions. They were, overall, a higher-risk population with a greater potential for bad outcomes, which is why tubes were placed preemptively.

Even so, at 6 months, the total average cost for the preop G-tube group was $39,751 versus $48,999 for the postoperative group, a savings of $9,248 per patient. The difference was driven by inpatient savings; the preop group left the hospital an average of 3.2 days sooner than their postop G-tube peers (9.4 days versus 12.6 days; P less than .001). Readmissions and other postdischarge costs were similar between the two groups, as were wound and nonwound complications.

“This data suggests that preoperative placement of G-tubes is associated with lower total health care costs. It appears there’s a potential for health care cost savings if candidates for G-tubes can be identified” before surgery and the tubes placed preoperatively, said investigator Joshua Waltonen, MD, of Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.

That’s exactly what Wake Forest is doing now. Physicians there use a scoring system to determine how likely patients are to need G-tubes after surgery. If the risk is high, patients are counseled that putting one in beforehand is a good idea, he said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The team previously found that risk factors include, among others, supracricoid laryngectomy, prior radiation, flap reconstruction, tracheostomy placement, and preop dysphagia and weight loss (JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014 Dec;140[12]:1198-206).

Two factors probably account for the shorter lengths of stay, Dr. Waltonen said. First, patients with preop feeding tubes go into surgery with a nutritional boost, which helps with recovery. Also, with a preop tube, patients don’t have to wait for general surgery to get around to placing one postoperatively.

Both groups were about 60 years old on average. The mean body mass index of the preop group was 23 kg/m^{2 and} 26 kg/m^{2 in the postop group} (P = .009). Almost two-thirds of preop patients had prior radiation versus a quarter of postop patients (P less than .001). Tumor and nodal stages were similar.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Waltonen had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – It’s better to place gastrostomy tubes before head and neck cancer surgery rather than after, according to a review of 184 patients.

The 73 patients in the study who got preoperative gastrostomy tubes (G-tubes) were sicker than the 111 who had G-tubes placed after surgery, with significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, lower body mass indexes, and greater likelihoods of having both prior radiation and more extensive resections requiring flap reconstructions. They were, overall, a higher-risk population with a greater potential for bad outcomes, which is why tubes were placed preemptively.

Even so, at 6 months, the total average cost for the preop G-tube group was $39,751 versus $48,999 for the postoperative group, a savings of $9,248 per patient. The difference was driven by inpatient savings; the preop group left the hospital an average of 3.2 days sooner than their postop G-tube peers (9.4 days versus 12.6 days; P less than .001). Readmissions and other postdischarge costs were similar between the two groups, as were wound and nonwound complications.

“This data suggests that preoperative placement of G-tubes is associated with lower total health care costs. It appears there’s a potential for health care cost savings if candidates for G-tubes can be identified” before surgery and the tubes placed preoperatively, said investigator Joshua Waltonen, MD, of Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.

That’s exactly what Wake Forest is doing now. Physicians there use a scoring system to determine how likely patients are to need G-tubes after surgery. If the risk is high, patients are counseled that putting one in beforehand is a good idea, he said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The team previously found that risk factors include, among others, supracricoid laryngectomy, prior radiation, flap reconstruction, tracheostomy placement, and preop dysphagia and weight loss (JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014 Dec;140[12]:1198-206).

Two factors probably account for the shorter lengths of stay, Dr. Waltonen said. First, patients with preop feeding tubes go into surgery with a nutritional boost, which helps with recovery. Also, with a preop tube, patients don’t have to wait for general surgery to get around to placing one postoperatively.

Both groups were about 60 years old on average. The mean body mass index of the preop group was 23 kg/m^{2 and} 26 kg/m^{2 in the postop group} (P = .009). Almost two-thirds of preop patients had prior radiation versus a quarter of postop patients (P less than .001). Tumor and nodal stages were similar.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Waltonen had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Direct, intraoperative electrical stimulation of the spinal accessory nerve reduced shoulder pain and dysfunction from oncologic neck dissection in a small, randomized trial.

Shoulder problems are common after neck dissection because of traction and compression of the spinal accessory nerve. Although brief electrical stimulation (BES) has been shown before to improve regeneration and recovery of injured peripheral nerves, it hasn’t been shown until now to help patients recover from neck surgery, said investigator Brittany Barber, MD, a fifth-year resident at the University of Alberta, Edmonton.

After neck dissection in 21 patients, the investigators wrapped a small electrode (Automatic Periodic Stimulation [APS] electrode, Medtronic) around the spinal accessory nerve at the base of the skull on the side of the neck with the most extensive nodal burden; the electrode delivered 100-msec pulses at 20 Hz and 3-5 V for an hour, and then the neck was closed. The team compared outcomes with 20 controls who had neck dissections without BES.

At 12 months, the BES group had an 8.4 point drop from baseline on the 100-point Constant Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, while the controls lost a mean of 29.4 points. The Murley score measures shoulder pain, performance of daily tasks, range of motion, and strength; higher scores are better. Similarly, BES patients lost a mean of 16.2 points on the 50-point Neck Dissection Impairment Index, while controls lost 30.1 points, and controls performed markedly worse on nerve conduction studies. In short, BES patients “were less likely to have clinically significant shoulder dysfunction” after surgery, Dr. Barber said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The APS electrode is a tiny silicone cuff with a metal conductor. The device was originally designed to monitor recurrent laryngeal nerve function during thyroid surgery. “We had [Medtronic] write a software patch” so it could be used for stimulation, she said.

The team is planning a larger, multicenter trial to shore up their findings, and also plans to test the device for hypoglossal nerve preservation after resection.

Transcutaneous nerve stimulation is another option, but it’s a bit uncomfortable and patients often don’t complete their sessions. “Compliance is not as good as with a single intraoperative procedure,” and the results aren’t that great. “We thought this might be a better alternative,” Dr. Barber said.

The two groups were well matched: Mean age was about 60 years and most patients had advanced-stage tumors. There was no difference in preop shoulder problems or risks for poor postop shoulder outcomes, and no difference in the number of level 5 neck dissections or mean number of lymph nodes removed during surgery.

There was no outside funding for the work. Dr. Barber had no disclosures; a coinvestigator was a Medtronic consultant.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Direct, intraoperative electrical stimulation of the spinal accessory nerve reduced shoulder pain and dysfunction from oncologic neck dissection in a small, randomized trial.

Shoulder problems are common after neck dissection because of traction and compression of the spinal accessory nerve. Although brief electrical stimulation (BES) has been shown before to improve regeneration and recovery of injured peripheral nerves, it hasn’t been shown until now to help patients recover from neck surgery, said investigator Brittany Barber, MD, a fifth-year resident at the University of Alberta, Edmonton.

After neck dissection in 21 patients, the investigators wrapped a small electrode (Automatic Periodic Stimulation [APS] electrode, Medtronic) around the spinal accessory nerve at the base of the skull on the side of the neck with the most extensive nodal burden; the electrode delivered 100-msec pulses at 20 Hz and 3-5 V for an hour, and then the neck was closed. The team compared outcomes with 20 controls who had neck dissections without BES.

At 12 months, the BES group had an 8.4 point drop from baseline on the 100-point Constant Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, while the controls lost a mean of 29.4 points. The Murley score measures shoulder pain, performance of daily tasks, range of motion, and strength; higher scores are better. Similarly, BES patients lost a mean of 16.2 points on the 50-point Neck Dissection Impairment Index, while controls lost 30.1 points, and controls performed markedly worse on nerve conduction studies. In short, BES patients “were less likely to have clinically significant shoulder dysfunction” after surgery, Dr. Barber said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The APS electrode is a tiny silicone cuff with a metal conductor. The device was originally designed to monitor recurrent laryngeal nerve function during thyroid surgery. “We had [Medtronic] write a software patch” so it could be used for stimulation, she said.

The team is planning a larger, multicenter trial to shore up their findings, and also plans to test the device for hypoglossal nerve preservation after resection.

Transcutaneous nerve stimulation is another option, but it’s a bit uncomfortable and patients often don’t complete their sessions. “Compliance is not as good as with a single intraoperative procedure,” and the results aren’t that great. “We thought this might be a better alternative,” Dr. Barber said.

The two groups were well matched: Mean age was about 60 years and most patients had advanced-stage tumors. There was no difference in preop shoulder problems or risks for poor postop shoulder outcomes, and no difference in the number of level 5 neck dissections or mean number of lymph nodes removed during surgery.

There was no outside funding for the work. Dr. Barber had no disclosures; a coinvestigator was a Medtronic consultant.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Direct, intraoperative electrical stimulation of the spinal accessory nerve reduced shoulder pain and dysfunction from oncologic neck dissection in a small, randomized trial.

Shoulder problems are common after neck dissection because of traction and compression of the spinal accessory nerve. Although brief electrical stimulation (BES) has been shown before to improve regeneration and recovery of injured peripheral nerves, it hasn’t been shown until now to help patients recover from neck surgery, said investigator Brittany Barber, MD, a fifth-year resident at the University of Alberta, Edmonton.

After neck dissection in 21 patients, the investigators wrapped a small electrode (Automatic Periodic Stimulation [APS] electrode, Medtronic) around the spinal accessory nerve at the base of the skull on the side of the neck with the most extensive nodal burden; the electrode delivered 100-msec pulses at 20 Hz and 3-5 V for an hour, and then the neck was closed. The team compared outcomes with 20 controls who had neck dissections without BES.

At 12 months, the BES group had an 8.4 point drop from baseline on the 100-point Constant Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, while the controls lost a mean of 29.4 points. The Murley score measures shoulder pain, performance of daily tasks, range of motion, and strength; higher scores are better. Similarly, BES patients lost a mean of 16.2 points on the 50-point Neck Dissection Impairment Index, while controls lost 30.1 points, and controls performed markedly worse on nerve conduction studies. In short, BES patients “were less likely to have clinically significant shoulder dysfunction” after surgery, Dr. Barber said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

The APS electrode is a tiny silicone cuff with a metal conductor. The device was originally designed to monitor recurrent laryngeal nerve function during thyroid surgery. “We had [Medtronic] write a software patch” so it could be used for stimulation, she said.

The team is planning a larger, multicenter trial to shore up their findings, and also plans to test the device for hypoglossal nerve preservation after resection.

Transcutaneous nerve stimulation is another option, but it’s a bit uncomfortable and patients often don’t complete their sessions. “Compliance is not as good as with a single intraoperative procedure,” and the results aren’t that great. “We thought this might be a better alternative,” Dr. Barber said.

The two groups were well matched: Mean age was about 60 years and most patients had advanced-stage tumors. There was no difference in preop shoulder problems or risks for poor postop shoulder outcomes, and no difference in the number of level 5 neck dissections or mean number of lymph nodes removed during surgery.

There was no outside funding for the work. Dr. Barber had no disclosures; a coinvestigator was a Medtronic consultant.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with head or neck desmoplastic melanoma is positive only 6% of the time, and it doesn’t change the risk of recurrence.

Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routine in more common forms of cutaneous melanoma, findings from a retrospective case-control study suggest that it’s “not really necessary” for desmoplastic melanoma (DM) of the head or neck, said lead investigator Dylan Roden, MD, of the department of otolaryngology, New York University. General surgeons have pretty much come to that conclusion for DM elsewhere on the body, but it hasn’t been shown before for neck and head lesions, he said.

DM, an invasive form of melanoma in which malignant cells are surrounded by fibrous tissue, accounts for maybe 2% of cutaneous melanomas, with half or so presenting on the head or neck. The reason SLNB is of less use than with other melanomas is that DM “doesn’t often spread through the lymphatics. It’s not that patients won’t ever have metastases, but maybe it will be through the blood. Removing a lymph node won’t necessarily” detect it, Dr. Roden said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Forgoing SLNB has the added benefit of shaving an hour and a half or more off surgery, which is important since DM patients tend to be older, he added.

The NYU team matched 32 of their cases with 60 controls with more common superficial spreading or nodular melanoma of the head and neck, based on age, gender, ulceration status, and tumor stage. Mean tumor thickness in both groups was more than 4 mm.

SLNB was performed in 16 DM patients (50%) and 36 control patients (60%); it was positive in one DM patient (6.3%) versus 8 of 28 controls with reported results (28.6%).

Eleven DM patients (34%) had a recurrence, which was less frequent then in controls, where 33 patients (55%) had a recurrence (P = .05). “SNLB did not change the risk of overall or regional recurrence” in DM, Dr. Roden said.

Recurrence was more than twice as likely in control patients (odds ratio, 2.33; P = .06). Meanwhile, recurrence in DM was linked to perineural invasion (P = .02), but not ulceration status (P = .12) or mitoses (P = .40).

DM patients also had better 5-year overall survival (79% versus 62%) and disease-free survival (70% versus 42%; P for both = .06). In general, DM “has a more favorable prognosis,” Dr. Roden said.

Cases and controls were in their mid-60s, on average, and most were men. Ulceration was present in about a quarter of patients. Mitosis was more common in superficial spreading and nodular patients (92% versus 53%; P less than .001), while perineural invasion was more common in DM (40% versus 7%; P less than.001).

Although outcomes were more favorable for DM, previous studies have found a higher rate of sentinel lymph node metastases – above 20% – for DM lesions with mixed, rather than pure, pathology. The 6.3% positive SLNB rate at NYU is more in line with what’s been reported before for pure lesions. The team plans to look into the matter.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Roden had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with head or neck desmoplastic melanoma is positive only 6% of the time, and it doesn’t change the risk of recurrence.

Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routine in more common forms of cutaneous melanoma, findings from a retrospective case-control study suggest that it’s “not really necessary” for desmoplastic melanoma (DM) of the head or neck, said lead investigator Dylan Roden, MD, of the department of otolaryngology, New York University. General surgeons have pretty much come to that conclusion for DM elsewhere on the body, but it hasn’t been shown before for neck and head lesions, he said.

DM, an invasive form of melanoma in which malignant cells are surrounded by fibrous tissue, accounts for maybe 2% of cutaneous melanomas, with half or so presenting on the head or neck. The reason SLNB is of less use than with other melanomas is that DM “doesn’t often spread through the lymphatics. It’s not that patients won’t ever have metastases, but maybe it will be through the blood. Removing a lymph node won’t necessarily” detect it, Dr. Roden said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Forgoing SLNB has the added benefit of shaving an hour and a half or more off surgery, which is important since DM patients tend to be older, he added.

The NYU team matched 32 of their cases with 60 controls with more common superficial spreading or nodular melanoma of the head and neck, based on age, gender, ulceration status, and tumor stage. Mean tumor thickness in both groups was more than 4 mm.

SLNB was performed in 16 DM patients (50%) and 36 control patients (60%); it was positive in one DM patient (6.3%) versus 8 of 28 controls with reported results (28.6%).

Eleven DM patients (34%) had a recurrence, which was less frequent then in controls, where 33 patients (55%) had a recurrence (P = .05). “SNLB did not change the risk of overall or regional recurrence” in DM, Dr. Roden said.

Recurrence was more than twice as likely in control patients (odds ratio, 2.33; P = .06). Meanwhile, recurrence in DM was linked to perineural invasion (P = .02), but not ulceration status (P = .12) or mitoses (P = .40).

DM patients also had better 5-year overall survival (79% versus 62%) and disease-free survival (70% versus 42%; P for both = .06). In general, DM “has a more favorable prognosis,” Dr. Roden said.

Cases and controls were in their mid-60s, on average, and most were men. Ulceration was present in about a quarter of patients. Mitosis was more common in superficial spreading and nodular patients (92% versus 53%; P less than .001), while perineural invasion was more common in DM (40% versus 7%; P less than.001).

Although outcomes were more favorable for DM, previous studies have found a higher rate of sentinel lymph node metastases – above 20% – for DM lesions with mixed, rather than pure, pathology. The 6.3% positive SLNB rate at NYU is more in line with what’s been reported before for pure lesions. The team plans to look into the matter.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Roden had no disclosures.

[email protected]

SEATTLE – Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with head or neck desmoplastic melanoma is positive only 6% of the time, and it doesn’t change the risk of recurrence.

Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routine in more common forms of cutaneous melanoma, findings from a retrospective case-control study suggest that it’s “not really necessary” for desmoplastic melanoma (DM) of the head or neck, said lead investigator Dylan Roden, MD, of the department of otolaryngology, New York University. General surgeons have pretty much come to that conclusion for DM elsewhere on the body, but it hasn’t been shown before for neck and head lesions, he said.

DM, an invasive form of melanoma in which malignant cells are surrounded by fibrous tissue, accounts for maybe 2% of cutaneous melanomas, with half or so presenting on the head or neck. The reason SLNB is of less use than with other melanomas is that DM “doesn’t often spread through the lymphatics. It’s not that patients won’t ever have metastases, but maybe it will be through the blood. Removing a lymph node won’t necessarily” detect it, Dr. Roden said at the International Conference on Head and Neck Cancer, held by the American Head and Neck Society.

Forgoing SLNB has the added benefit of shaving an hour and a half or more off surgery, which is important since DM patients tend to be older, he added.

The NYU team matched 32 of their cases with 60 controls with more common superficial spreading or nodular melanoma of the head and neck, based on age, gender, ulceration status, and tumor stage. Mean tumor thickness in both groups was more than 4 mm.

SLNB was performed in 16 DM patients (50%) and 36 control patients (60%); it was positive in one DM patient (6.3%) versus 8 of 28 controls with reported results (28.6%).

Eleven DM patients (34%) had a recurrence, which was less frequent then in controls, where 33 patients (55%) had a recurrence (P = .05). “SNLB did not change the risk of overall or regional recurrence” in DM, Dr. Roden said.

Recurrence was more than twice as likely in control patients (odds ratio, 2.33; P = .06). Meanwhile, recurrence in DM was linked to perineural invasion (P = .02), but not ulceration status (P = .12) or mitoses (P = .40).

DM patients also had better 5-year overall survival (79% versus 62%) and disease-free survival (70% versus 42%; P for both = .06). In general, DM “has a more favorable prognosis,” Dr. Roden said.

Cases and controls were in their mid-60s, on average, and most were men. Ulceration was present in about a quarter of patients. Mitosis was more common in superficial spreading and nodular patients (92% versus 53%; P less than .001), while perineural invasion was more common in DM (40% versus 7%; P less than.001).

Although outcomes were more favorable for DM, previous studies have found a higher rate of sentinel lymph node metastases – above 20% – for DM lesions with mixed, rather than pure, pathology. The 6.3% positive SLNB rate at NYU is more in line with what’s been reported before for pure lesions. The team plans to look into the matter.

There was no outside funding for the work, and Dr. Roden had no disclosures.

[email protected]