A comparison between p16-positive head and neck cancer of unknown primary (HPV-HNCUP) and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV-OPSCC): are they the same disease?

INTRODUCTION: The following study aimed to answer the question if HPV-HNCUP and HPV-OPSCC are the same disease. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare the oncological outcomes of both groups, in particular the 5-year overall survival rate (OS), the 5-year disease specific survival rate (DSS) and the 5-year progression free survival rate (PFS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Firstly, between January 1st, 2007, and March 31st, 2020 a total of 131 patients were treated with HNCUP at our Department. Out of these, 21 patients with a confirmed positive p16 status were referred to surgery followed by adjuvant therapy. Secondly, between January 1st, 2000, and January 31st, 2017, a total of 1596 patients were treated with an OPSSC at our Department. Out of these, 126 patients with a confirmed positive p16 status were referred to surgery followed by adjuvant therapy. After PSM, 84 patients with HPV-OPSCC and 21 HPV-HNCUP remained in the study for further comparison. RESULTS: The OS was 63.5% (95% CI 39.4-87.6) for HPV-HNCUP and 88.9% (95% CI 90.4-100.0) for HPV-OPSCC patients and therefore, significantly lower for the first mentioned (p = 0.013). The DSS was also significantly impaired for HPV-HNCUP (71.0%, 95% CI 46.3-95.7), in comparison with HPV-OPSCC patients (95.5%, 95% CI 90.4-100.0; p = 0.002). The PFS for HPV-HNCUP patients was lower (75.6%, 95% CI 54.0-97.2) yet not significantly different to HPV-OPSCC (90.4%, 95% CI 83.5-97.3; p = 0.067). CONCLUSIONS: The results presented demonstrate a significant reduced OS and DSS for HPV-HNCUP patients. Accordingly, in our study HPV-HNCUP and HPV-OPSCC are two different entities with a different oncological outcome.

Advance directives in patients with head and neck cancer - status quo and factors influencing their creation.

BACKGROUND: Advance Care Planning including living wills and durable powers of attorney for healthcare is a highly relevant topic aiming to increase patient autonomy and reduce medical overtreatment. Data from patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) are not currently available. The main objective of this study was to survey the frequency of advance directives (AD) in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: In this single center cross-sectional study, we evaluated patients during their regular follow-up consultations at Germany's largest tertiary referral center for head and neck cancer, regarding the frequency, characteristics, and influencing factors for the creation of advance directives using a questionnaire tailored to our cohort. The advance directives included living wills, durable powers of attorney for healthcare, and combined directives. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-six patients were surveyed from 07/01/2019 to 12/31/2019 (response rate = 68.9%). The mean age was 62.4 years (SD 11.9), 26.9% were women (n = 120). 46.4% of patients (n = 207) reported having authored at least one advance directive. These documents included 16 durable powers of attorney for healthcare (3.6%), 75 living wills (16.8%), and 116 combined directives (26.0%). In multivariate regression analysis, older age (OR ≤ 0.396, 95% CI 0.181-0.868; p = 0.021), regular medication (OR = 1.896, 95% CI 1.029-3.494; p = 0.040), and the marital status ("married": OR = 2.574, 95% CI 1.142-5.802; p = 0.023; and "permanent partnership": OR = 6.900, 95% CI 1.312-36.295; p = 0.023) emerged as significant factors increasing the likelihood of having an advance directive. In contrast, the stage of disease, the therapeutic regimen, the ECOG status, and the time from initial diagnosis did not correlate with the presence of any type of advance directive. Ninety-one patients (44%) with advance directives created their documents before the initial diagnoses of head and neck cancer. Most patients who decide to draw up an advance directive make the decision themselves or are motivated to do so by their immediate environment. Only 7% of patients (n = 16) actively made a conscious decision not create an advance directive. CONCLUSION: Less than half of head and neck cancer patients had created an advance directive, and very few patients have made a conscious decision not to do so. Older and comorbid patients who were married or in a permanent partnership had a higher likelihood of having an appropriate document. Advance directives are an essential component in enhancing patient autonomy and allow patients to be treated according to their wishes even when they are unable to consent. Therefore, maximum efforts are advocated to increase the prevalence of advance directives, especially in head and neck cancer patients, whose disease often takes a crisis-like course.

Cartilaginous bending spring tympanoplasty: a temporal bone study and first clinical results.

OBJECTIVE: Anchoring grafts for tympanic membrane (TM) reconstruction in anterior and subtotal TM defects is essential to prevent medialisation and can be facilitated by cartilaginous bending spring tympanoplasty (CBST). The purpose of this study was to analyse the impact of spring cartilages on middle ear transfer functions and patient hearing levels. METHODS: In six fresh-frozen human temporal bones a cartilage graft (measuring 6 × 2 mm with a thickness of 0.1-0.2 mm) was formed into a 'U'-shaped bending spring, to be placed between the medial tympanic wall and the tympanic underlay grafts. The stapes velocity for excitation by exponential sweeps from 400 to 10,000 Hz was measured with a laser Doppler vibrometer. The resulting middle ear transfer functions were compared with the reconstructed middle ear. For clinical evaluation, 23 ears in 21 patients with chronic otitis media and an intact ossicular chain were operated using CBST. At each follow-up visit, the patients underwent pure-tone audiometry and the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test at a presentation level of 65 dB SPL for the word recognition score (WRS). RESULTS: The measured stapes velocities at one-third octave midband frequencies averaged 3.56 × 10-2 ± 9.46 × 10-3 (mm/s/Pa) compared to 3.06 × 10-2 ± 6.86 × 10-3 (mm/s/Pa) with the bending and underlay cartilage in place (p = 0.319; r = 0.32). The bending spring tympanoplasty reduced the transfer function by 1.41 ± 0.98 dB on average. In the clinical part of the study, the graft success rate was 96% (22 out of 23 patients) after a mean follow-up of 5.8 ± 2.4 months (min. 3.5 months, max. 12.0 months). The air-bone gap improved significantly by 6.2 dB (± 6.6 dB; p < 0.001; r = 0.69), as well as the WRS from 61.8 ± 33.3% preoperatively to 80.0 ± 20.9% postoperatively (p = 0.031; r = 0.35). CONCLUSION: Experimental data as well as initial clinical results suggest that CBST is an effective method for reconstructing anterior or subtotal defects of the tympanic membrane with satisfactory audiologic results and graft success rates comparable to previously described methods. It can, therefore, be added to the arsenal of tympanoplasty techniques for anterior and subtotal TM perforations.

Relevance of the time interval between surgery and adjuvant radio (chemo) therapy in HPV-negative and advanced head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP).

INTRODUCTION: In contrast to head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), the effect of treatment duration in HNSCC-CUP has not been thoroughly investigated. Thus, this study aimed to assess the impact of the time interval between surgery and adjuvant therapy on the oncologic outcome, in particular the 5-year overall survival rate (OS), in advanced stage, HPV-negative CUPs at a tertiary referral hospital. 5-year disease specific survival rate (DSS) and progression free survival rate (PFS) are defined as secondary objectives. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between January 1st, 2007, and March 31st, 2020 a total of 131 patients with CUP were treated. Out of these, 59 patients with a confirmed negative p16 analysis were referred to a so-called CUP-panendoscopy with simultaneous unilateral neck dissection followed by adjuvant therapy. The cut-off between tumor removal and delivery of adjuvant therapy was set at the median, i.e. patients receiving adjuvant therapy below or above the median time interval. RESULTS: Depending on the median time interval of 55 days (d) (95% CI 51.42-84.52), 30 patients received adjuvant therapy within 55 d (mean 41.69 d, SD = 9.03) after surgery in contrast to 29 patients at least after 55 d (mean 73.21 d, SD = 19.16). All patients involved in the study were diagnosed in advanced tumor stages UICC III (n = 4; 6.8%), IVA (n = 27; 45.8%) and IVB (n = 28; 47.5%). Every patient was treated with curative neck dissection. Adjuvant chemo (immune) radiation was performed in 55 patients (93.2%), 4 patients (6.8%) underwent adjuvant radiation only. The mean follow-up time was 43.6 months (SD = 36.7 months). The 5-year OS rate for all patients involved was 71% (95% CI 0.55-0.86). For those patients receiving adjuvant therapy within 55 d (77, 95% CI 0.48-1.06) the OS rate was higher, yet not significantly different from those with delayed treatment (64, 95% CI 0.42-0.80; X2(1) = 1.16, p = 0.281). Regarding all patients, the 5-year DSS rate was 86% (95% CI 0.75-0.96). Patients submitted to adjuvant treatment in less than 55 d the DSS rate was 95% (95% CI 0.89-1.01) compared to patients submitted to adjuvant treatment equal or later than 55 d (76% (95% CI 0.57-0.95; X2(1) = 2.32, p = 0.128). The 5-year PFS rate of the entire cohort was 72% (95% CI 0.59-0.85). In the group < 55 d the PFS rate was 78% (95% CI 0.63-0.94) and thus not significantly different from 65% (95% CI 0.45-0.85) of the group ≥55 d; (X2(1) = 0.29, p = 0.589). CONCLUSIONS: The results presented suggest that the oncologic outcome of patients with advanced, HPV-negative CUP of the head and neck was not significantly affected by a prolonged period between surgery and adjuvant therapy. Nevertheless, oncologic outcome tends to be superior for early adjuvant therapy.

Risk of magnetic resonance imaging-induced magnet dislocation for different types of cochlear implants: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: When performing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with a cochlear implant (CI), complication rates vary widely in the literature. The primary objective of this retrospective study was to determine the prevalence of complications, in particular magnet dislocation, in patients with CI undergoing 1.5 Tesla (T) MRI. As a secondary objective, the prevalence of magnet dislocation for specific cochlear implant device types was elaborated. METHODS: In a single-center retrospective study, all patients with a cochlear implant presenting for an MRI examination at 1.5 T at our institution between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2020 were included. Implants with axial and diametrical magnets were included in the study. MRI safety measures were applied before imaging. The prevalence of complications was evaluated. Magnet dislocation rates were calculated for device types with at least 20 MRI exposures. RESULTS: During the study period, 196 MRI examinations were performed in a total of 128 patients, accounting for 149 different implants (21 implanted bilaterally) with a total of 231 implant exposures to MRI (average 1.69 ± 1.57; min. 1, max. 12). Complications were reported in 50 out of 231 cochlear implant exposures (21.6%). Magnet dislocation occurred in a total of 27 cases (11.7%). Dislocation rates were 29.6% for the Cochlear® CI500 series (24 dislocations from 81 exposures), 1.1% for the Cochlear® CI24RE series (1 from 87) and 0% for the MED-EL® Synchrony (0 from 36). The dislocation rate for the CI500 was significantly higher than for the CI24RE (χ2(1) = 26.86; p < 0.001; ϕ = 0.40) or the Synchrony (χ2(1) = 13.42; p < 0.001; ϕ = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: For 1.5 T MRI, the risk of magnet dislocation ranges from 0 to 29.6% and depends on the CI device type. Implants with a diametrical magnet can be considered potentially MRI-safe, whereas in CIs with axial magnets, the CI500 is at high risk of magnet dislocation. Therefore, apart from a strict indication for an MRI and adherence to safety protocols, post-MRI follow-up examination to rule out magnet dislocation is recommended.

The Effects of a 'New Generation' of Heat and Moisture Exchangers in Laryngectomized Patients with Previous Heat and Moisture Exchanger Experience.

Objectives: To evaluate the effects of a new generation of heat and moisture exchangers (NG-HMEs) on pulmonary rehabilitation, quality of life, patient satisfaction, and usage patterns. Methods: A prospective observational study on 23 laryngectomized patients with prior HME experience from June 1, 2021 to November 30, 2021. Patients were interviewed at inclusion, after 6 weeks and after 12 weeks after the introduction of NG-HMEs. Two validated questionnaires were used to report pulmonary complaints and quality of life: the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q), the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Index Score (EQ-5D Index Score), and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Visual Analog Scale (EQ-5D-VAS). Usage patterns and patient satisfaction were reported using study-specific questionnaires. Results: The patients had an average age of 65.7 ± 6.8 years, with 87% being male, on average 33.7 ± 35.3 months after total laryngectomy (TLE). NG-HMEs were used for a mean of 21.87 ± 4.63 hours/day (P = .034). After 12 weeks of use, patients reported the following changes in the CASA-Q domains: cough symptoms (+5; P = .663), cough impact (0; P = .958), sputum symptoms (+8; P = .13), and sputum impact (+3; P = .489). The EQ-5D index score increased (+0.024; P = .917) as well as the EQ-5D VAS (+0.8; P = .27). All patients rated their experience with NG-HMEs with ≥3 out of 5. The patients who used NG-HMEs as instructed (n = 13) reported more profound changes in the CASA-Q domains: cough symptom (+11; P = .129), cough impact (+7; P = .209), sputum symptom (+11; P = .123), and sputum impact (+10; P = .102). Conclusions: Our results show that NG-HMEs could have a positive clinical impact on pulmonary rehabilitation after TLE, even in HME-experienced patients. The use of NG-HMEs does not affect the quality of life. The possible effects of NG-HMEs require further evaluation in long-term studies to fully assess their efficacy.

Surgical Versus Noninvasive Manual Repositioning After Cochlear Implant Partial Magnet Dislocation.

Objectives: To compare surgical magnet repositioning (SMR) and noninvasive manual magnet repositioning (MMR) as treatments for partial magnet dislocation (PMD) of the internal magnet in a cochlear implant (CI) caused by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The primary objective was the success rate, while the secondary objectives were total postinterventional CI downtime and complications. Methods: This single-center retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary referral medical center. Patients with CI treated for PMD between January 1, 2007 and September 30, 2022 were included. SMR served as primary treatment until June 2019 and as secondary treatment after the introduction of MMR. Results: A total of 51 cases of PMD were observed in 42 patients and 43 devices (18 ♀; 24 ♂; 12 with bilateral CI). MMR was performed successfully in 19 out of 20 cases (95%), while 32 cases were managed successfully by SMR. The median age at first magnet repositioning was 53.8 years (minimum 19 years, maximum 93 years). When MMR was performed, the mean time from diagnosis to treatment (0.5 ± 1.5 days vs 9.8 ± 7.6 days; P < .01), the mean time from repositioning to CI reactivation (1.4 ± 4.3 days vs 13.1 ± 6.7 days; P < .01), and the mean total CI downtime (1.9 ± 4.8 days vs 22.9 ± 11.9 days; P < .01) were significantly shorter compared to SMR. Significantly fewer complications were experienced with MMR [n = 0 (0%) vs n = 8 (25%); P = .04]. Conclusion: In case of PMD caused by MRI, noninvasive MMR shows a high success rate with a shorter total CI downtime as well as a lower complication rate compared to SMR. Therefore, MMR should be considered as first line treatment with SMR as a second option in case of failure.

Factors Influencing the Outcome of Head and Neck Cancer of Unknown Primary (HNCUP).

Background: This study on patients with head and neck cancer of unknown primary (HNCUP) assesses the impact of surgical and non-surgical treatment modalities and the tumour biology on the oncological outcome. Methods: A total of 80 patients with HNCUP (UICC I−IV) were treated with simultaneous neck dissection followed by adjuvant therapy, between 1 January 2007 and 31 March 2020. As the primary objective, the influence of treatment modalities on the overall survival (OS), the disease-specific survival (DSS) and the progression-free survival (PFS) were analysed in terms of cox regression and recursive partitioning. The tumour biology served as secondary objectives. Results: The 5-year OS for the entire cohort was 67.7%, (95% CI: 54.2−81.2%), the 5-year DSS was 82.3% (72.1−92.5%) and the 5-year PFS was 72.8% (61.8−83.8%). Cox regression revealed that patients undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy only had a four times higher risk to die compared to patients receiving chemoradiation therapy (HR = 4.45 (1.40; 14.17), p = 0.012). The development of distant metastases had a significantly negative impact on OS (HR = 8.24 (3.21−21.15), p < 0.001) and DSS (HR = 23.79 (6.32−89.56), p < 0.001). Recursive portioning underlined the negative influence of distant metastases on OS (3.2-fold increase in death probability) and DSS (4.3-fold increase in death probability), while an UICC stage of IVb increased the risk for further progression of the disease by a factor of 2. Conclusions: The presence of distant metastases as well as adjuvant treatment with radiation without concomitant chemotherapy, were among others, significant predictors for the overall survival of HNCUP patients, with distant metastases being the most significant predictor.

Results of contralateral anastomosis of microvascular free flaps in head and neck reconstruction.

OBJECTIVES: Despite various solutions to the issue of ipsilateral vessel-depleted neck in microvascular head and neck reconstruction, concrete data on its safety and implementation are scarce. This paper focuses on the feasibility and success rates of contralateral anastomosis in free flap reconstruction in the head and neck region. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study at a tertiary referral center includes all patients who underwent free flap reconstruction of the head and neck with contralateral anastomosis between January 1st, 2007 and February 28th, 2021. Primary objectives were frequency, success, and flap-associated complication rates. Secondary objectives were recipient vessels and flap type. RESULTS: Of 318 patients who underwent microvascular reconstruction, anastomosis was performed on the contralateral side of the neck in 32 patients (10.0%). Recipient vessels involved mainly the superior thyroid artery (74.2%; n = 23) and the facial vein (51.1%; n = 23). Thirty patients (93.8%) received a radial forearm free flap. Flap-associated complications occurred in 12.5% of included cases (n = 4): one partial flap necrosis (3.1%), one anastomotic insufficiency (3.1%), one venous thrombosis of the microvascular pedicle (3.1%), and one wound dehiscence (3.1%). All of these complications were resolved without complete flap loss. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that contralateral anastomosis is a successful and safe option in microvascular head and neck reconstruction, especially using a radial forearm free flap. Thus, anastomosing to the contralateral side of the neck can be advocated as a valuable option in the ipsilateral vessel-depleted neck.

Pain management after tonsillectomy-by demand or by-the-clock-is there a difference?

PURPOSE: To improve pain management after tonsillectomy (TE) by comparing individual analgesic management by demand versus a fixed-scheduled analgesic treatment protocol in a prospective trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients received individual pain treatment by demand (control group) followed by 40 patients who were treated by a fixed-scheduled four-staged escalating analgesic protocol (intervention group) after TE. Minimum and maximum pain as well as pain on ambulation (NRS 0-10) on the first postoperative day were defined as primary objectives. Secondary endpoints comprised the analgesic score, treatment-related side effects/pain-associated impairments, wish for more pain medication, and patient satisfaction. Patients were surveyed using the standardized and validated "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Treatment" (QUIPS) questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients of the control group reported comparable minimum (2.03 ± 1.42 vs 2.38 ± 1.79, P = 0.337, r = 0.110) and maximum pain (6.65 ± 2.10 vs 6.93 ± 1.86, P = 0.536, r = 0.07) and pain on ambulation (4.73 ± 2.26 vs 5.18 ± 2.19, P = 0.370, r = 0.10) compared to the intervention group. Patients in both groups were comparably well satisfied with the pain treatment (7.53 ± 2.40 vs 7.73 ± 2.30, P = 0.704, r = 0.04), experienced similar side effects and functional impairments (P > 0.050, Φ < 0.3), and did not ask for much more analgesic medication (P = 0.152, Φ = 0.160). CONCLUSION: Pain control following TE was not distinctly affected by applying a fixed-scheduled analgesic treatment protocol compared to individual analgesic therapy. In conclusion, analgesic treatment after TE remains unsatisfying. Consequently, further efforts are needed to achieve a standardized and effective approach to the underlying pathophysiological causes of pain following TE.