A comparison of endoscopic endonasal versus open approaches for skull base chordoma: a comprehensive National Cancer Database analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The authors of this study aimed to investigate independent prognostic factors of survival with a particular focus on comparing the safety and efficacy of endoscopic endonasal versus open approaches in the surgical management of skull base chordoma. METHODS: A retrospective National Cancer Database review of skull base chordoma patients was performed to capture resection cases from 2010 to 2020, evaluating overall survival (OS), early postoperative mortality, readmission rates, and hospital length of stay (LOS) between surgical approaches and the independent prognostication of death utilizing Cox multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: Among the 736 patients included in the cohort, 456 patients (62.0%) and 280 patients (38.0%) underwent endoscopic endonasal and open resection, respectively. These values represent a rate of change over the study period of +4.1 versus -0.14 cases per year, respectively. Gross-total resection was achieved in 32.5% of cases. A positive margin status was found in 51.8% of cases. There was no association between extent of resection and surgical approach (p = 0.257). There was no difference in OS (p = 0.562), 30- and 90-day mortality (p = 0.209 and 0.126, respectively), and 30-day readmission (p = 0.438) between the two surgical groups. The mean LOS was reduced by 2.1 days in the endoscopic cohort (p = 0.013) compared with the open approach cohort. Finally, multivariate analysis revealed a tumor size ≥ 4 cm (HR 4.03, p = 0.005) and public insurance (HR 2.76, p = 0.004) as negative predictors of survival and treatment at an academic center (HR 0.36, p = 0.043) as a positive prognosticator of survival. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic endonasal approach has been increasingly utilized over time and touts noninferiority with respect to safety and efficacy with a marked improvement in LOS, which carries substantial implications for both healthcare costs and enhanced patient recovery. Future prospective studies are necessary to further delineate trends and surgical outcomes for skull base chordoma.

Role of social determinants of health on quality of life in pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis.

KEY POINTS: Social determinants of health link to worse quality of life in pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis. The area deprivation index (ADI) may serve to predict health disparities in these patients.

Utilization of Face-to-Face Vestibular Support Groups: A Comparison to Online Group Participation.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the utilization and outcomes of face-to-face (F2F) vestibular support groups and online support communities (OSC) for individuals with vestibular disorders. METHODS: We distributed a 31-question anonymous electronic survey through the Vestibular Disorders Association (VeDA) to F2F participants, categorizing user involvement in F2F, OSCs, or both and assessed impact on medical decision-making, psychosocial benefits, and goals achieved. RESULTS: The F2F cohort consisted of 97 individuals comprising primarily of non-Hispanic White women (mean age = 57 years, SD ± 14 years) with diagnoses including persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (19%), Meniere's disease (15%), and vestibular neuritis (13%). Most participants were diagnosed by an otolaryngologist (65%) and attended F2F meetings monthly or less frequently (78%). The OSC group comprised of 551 individuals, primarily of non-Hispanic White women, but was younger in age (mean age = 50 years, SD ± 13 years). OSC participants notably engaged more, with 36% participating on a daily basis and 32% multiple times a week. F2F participants were older (mean age 57 years vs 50 years, P < .001) and more commonly referred by medical professionals (22% F2F vs 6% OSC, P < .001). Both groups had similar achieved goals, including hearing from others with the same diagnosis (84% vs 89%, P > .05) and similar impact on medical decision-making (75% vs 78%, P > .05). More F2F participants reported increased development of coping skills (79% F2F vs 69% OSC, P = .037). OSC participants typically found the group via an online search (75%), compared to 51% for F2F. OSC participants had higher daily engagement (36%) compared to F2F (1%). CONCLUSION: F2F users are older and more commonly referred by medical professionals. Despite less frequent engagement, F2F participants reported similar influences on achieved goals, medical decision-making, and impact on psychosocial benefits. These findings highlight the importance of both F2F and OSC support groups for individuals with vestibular disorders.