Elective neck dissection in T1/T2 oral squamous cell carcinoma with N0 neck: essential or not? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is characterized by a high risk of cervical lymph node metastasis with a high incidence of occult metastasis. A strong debate is still present regarding the best treatment for early oral cavity cancer with N0 neck. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare between the results of elective neck dissection (END) and watchful waiting (observation or therapeutic neck dissection) in patients with early-stage (T1/T2) oral squamous cell carcinoma with N0 neck. DATA SOURCES: Medline database (https://www.pubmed.com), Google Scholar and Scopus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the evaluation of regional recurrence rate and 5-year survival rate after elective neck dissection (END) or watchful waiting in early oral cancers were conducted. This study included published English medical articles (which met our predetermined inclusion criteria) in the last 30 years, concerning early oral SCC with N0 neck. 24 articles were included (4 randomized studies and 20 observational "retrospective" studies) with a total number of 2190 of patients who underwent END and 1619 who underwent watchful waiting. Regarding the 5-year survival rate, (10) studies were included with a total number of 1211 patients who underwent END and 948 who underwent watchful waiting. RESULTS: Regarding the regional recurrence rate, (END) was associated with significantly lower risk of recurrence when compared with observation. Regarding the 5-year survival rate, END was associated with a better survival rate than the observational group. CONCLUSIONS: Elective neck dissection is better than watchful waiting in early (T1/T2) stage oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma with N0 neck, regarding regional recurrence and 5-year survival rate.

The Value of Endoscopic Exposure of Round Window in Cochlear Implant via Facial Recess.

Introduction Cochlear implantation has been considered as the best treatment in patients with severe to profound hearing loss unaidable with hearing aids. The main value of endoscope-assisted cochlear implantation is improved visibility of the RW Objective to assess the value of endoscopic assisted CI surgery via facial recess approach without elevating tympanic anulus. Methods This Prospective case series study non-randomized sample was performed on 50 patients with severe to profound hearing loss unaidable with hearing aids undergoing unilateral endoscopic assisted cochlear implant surgery with round window electrode insertion Results There were 23 male and 27 female patients. Most of the cases were children (41 cases). Of those 50 patients, 39 were prelingually hearing impaired. Four cases had various inner ear abnormalities. The standard mastoidectomy and Posterior Tympanotomy approach were used for all cases. Endoscopic identification of the RW through the PT enabled us to perform regular surgery in all cases. The current study concludes the difference between microscopic exposure and endoscopic exposure represented by Saint Tomas classification found that endoscopic exposure of round window classification is better represented by downgrading in the classification of round window exposure as type I 29(58%), type IIa 18(36%) type IIb 3 (6%) Non were type III by endoscopic exposure compared to microscopic exposure of round window is a type I 7(14%), type II 14(28%), type IIb 22(44%) and type III 7 (14%). Conclusion Endoscopy proved a great value in exposure and identification of RW in CI surgery through posterior tympanotomy approach.

Landmarks for Proper Round Window Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implantation.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the role of landmarks for proper round window electrode insertion in cochlear implantation surgery. METHODS: This is a case series study. We included 150 patients undergoing cochlear implantation in a tertiary medical center during the period from January to December 2019. Patients with inner ear malformations or ossification or revision surgery were excluded. Three surgeons partici- pated in the study. During surgery, the round window electrode insertion was marked using 5 surgical landmarks: oval window, pyramid, fustis, round window membrane, and arborization of intracochlear blood vessels. Each surgeon reported on the identification of each landmark and its reliability for round window electrode insertion. RESULTS: Oval window and round window membrane were clearly seen by the 3 surgeons in all cases. Pyramid was seen in 94% of cases, fustis in 85%, and intracochlear wall in 90% of cases. The postoperative transorbital x-ray confirmed the intracochlear position of electrodes in all cases. CONCLUSION: Round window electrode insertion can be precisely performed using these 5 surgical landmarks in straight forwards cases as well as in difficult cases. These landmarks can also assist in teaching young surgeons, in a step-wise manner, how to properly do round window electrode insertion in cochlear implantation surgery.

The Value of Endoscopic Exposure of Round Window in Cochlear Implant via Facial Recess

Abstract Introduction Cochlear implantation has been considered as the best treatment in patients with severe to profound hearing loss unaidable with hearing aids. The main value of endoscope-assisted cochlear implantation is improved visibility of the RW Objective to assess the value of endoscopic assisted CI surgery via facial recess approach without elevating tympanic anulus. Methods This Prospective case series study non-randomized sample was performed on 50 patients with severe to profound hearing loss unaidable with hearing aids undergoing unilateral endoscopic assisted cochlear implant surgery with round window electrode insertion Results There were 23 male and 27 female patients. Most of the cases were children (41 cases). Of those 50 patients, 39 were prelingually hearing impaired. Fourcases had various inner ear abnormalities. The standard mastoidectomy and Posterior Tympanotomy approach were used for all cases. Endoscopic identification of the RW through the PT enabled us to perform regular surgery in all cases. The current study concludes the difference between microscopic exposure and endoscopic exposure represented by Saint Tomas classification found that endoscopic exposure of round window classification is better represented by downgrading in the classification of round window exposure as type I 29(58%), type IIa 18(36%) type IIb 3 (6%) Non were type III by endoscopic exposure compared to microscopic exposure of round window is a type I 7 (14%), type II 14(28%), type IIb 22(44%) and type III 7 (14%). Conclusion Endoscopy proved a great value in exposure and identification of RW in CI surgery through posterior tympanotomy approach,