COVID-19 pandemic: Effects and evidence-based recommendations for otolaryngology and head and neck surgery practice.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a highly contagious zoonosis produced by SARS-CoV-2 that is spread human-to-human by respiratory secretions. It was declared by the WHO as a public health emergency. The most susceptible populations, needing mechanical ventilation, are the elderly and people with associated comorbidities. There is an important risk of contagion for anesthetists, dentists, head and neck surgeons, maxillofacial surgeons, ophthalmologists, and otolaryngologists. Health workers represent between 3.8% and 20% of the infected population; some 15% will develop severe complaints and among them, many will lose their lives. A large number of patients do not have overt signs and symptoms (fever/respiratory), yet pose a real risk to surgeons (who should know this fact and must therefore apply respiratory protective strategies for all patients they encounter). All interventions that have the potential to aerosolize aerodigestive secretions should be avoided or used only when mandatory. Health workers who are: pregnant, over 55 to 65 years of age, with a history of chronic diseases (uncontrolled hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, and all clinical scenarios where immunosuppression is feasible, including that induced to treat chronic inflammatory conditions and organ transplants) should avoid the clinical attention of a potentially infected patient. Health care facilities should prioritize urgent and emergency visits and procedures until the present condition stabilizes; truly elective care should cease and discussed on a case-by-case basis for patients with cancer. For those who are working with COVID-19 infected patients' isolation is compulsory in the following settings: (a) unprotected close contact with COVID-19 pneumonia patients; (b) onset of fever, cough, shortness of breath, and other symptoms (gastrointestinal complaints, anosmia, and dysgeusia have been reported in a minority of cases). For any care or intervention in the upper aerodigestive tract region, irrespective of the setting and a confirmed diagnosis (eg, rhinoscopy or flexible laryngoscopy in the outpatient setting and tracheostomy or rigid endoscopy under anesthesia), it is strongly recommended that all health care personnel wear personal protective equipment such as N95, gown, cap, eye protection, and gloves. The procedures described are essential in trying to maintain safety of health care workers during COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, otolaryngologists, head and neck, and maxillofacial surgeons are per se exposed to the greatest risk of infection while caring for COVID-19 positive subjects, and their protection should be considered a priority in the present circumstances.

Impact of radiographic findings on for prognosis skin cancer with perineural invasion.

OBJECTIVES: Update our experience using radiotherapy (RT) for head-and-neck squamous or basal cell carcinoma with clinical perineural invasion (PNI) and correlate radiographic findings with outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We treated 65 patients with cT4N0 head-and-neck skin cancers with clinical PNI from 1965 to 2009 (N0 disease, 59; N1 disease, 6). Treatment included RT alone (N=18), RT with concurrent chemotherapy (N=14), surgery and postoperative RT (N=26), or postoperative RT with concurrent chemotherapy (N=5), and preoperative RT and surgery (N=2). Patients were stratified by imaging-negative disease (N=11), minimal or moderate peripheral disease (N=18), and macroscopic and/or central disease (N=36). Median RT dose was 72.6 Gy (50.4 to 79.2 Gy). Median follow-up overall and for living patients was 5.4 and 11.6 years, respectively. RESULTS: Five-year outcomes for imaging-negative disease versus minimal/moderate peripheral disease versus macroscopic/central disease were: local control, 81% versus 60% versus 47% (P=0.23); local-regional control, 80% versus 54% versus 47% (P=0.22); neck control, 100% versus 89% versus 93% (P=0.45); and distant metastasis-free survival, 89% versus 100% versus 93% (P=0.57), respectively. Five-year survival rates for imaging-negative disease versus minimal/moderate peripheral disease versus macroscopic/central disease were: overall survival, 82% versus 50% versus 52% (P=0.26), and cause-specific survival, 100% versus 58% versus 65% (P=0.08). Twenty-two (34%) patients had 1 or more severe (grade ≥3) late complications. CONCLUSIONS: There is a nonsignificant trend towards improved local control for imaging-negative patients and patients with minimal/moderate peripheral disease compared with macroscopic/central disease. Although survival appears better for imaging-negative patients, extent of imaging-positive PNI did not impact overall or cause-specific survival.