Functional or radical surgical treatment of laryngeal chondrosarcoma, analysis of survival and prognostic factors: A REFCOR and NetSarc-ResOs multicenter study of 74 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Laryngeal chondrosarcoma (LCS) is a rare tumor of slow evolution whose treatment is poorly codified. For a long time, a radical treatment by total laryngectomy (TL) was proposed. More recent studies tend to propose a conservative surgical approach of the larynx. The objective of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of total laryngectomized patients (TL+) versus non-laryngectomized patients (TL-). The secondary objectives were to analyse the reoperation free survival (RFS), the total laryngectomy free survival (TLFS) and to identify the preoperative factors leading surgeons to propose TL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected incident cases from the REFCOR and NetSarc-ResOs multicenter databases between March 1997 and June 2021 was conducted. A propensity score matching analysis was performed to compare the OS of TL+ and TL-patients. RESULTS: 74 patients were included. After propensity score, the 5-year OS of TL+ and TL-patients was comparable (100 %, p = 1). The 5-year RFS rate was 69.2 % (95 % CI [57.5-83.4]) and the 5-year TLFS was 61.7 % (95 % CI [50.4-75.5]). Cricoid involvement greater than 50 % (HR 3.58; IC 95 % [1.61-7.92] p < 0.001), an ASA score of 3 or 4 (HR 5.07; IC 95 % [1.64-15.67] p = 0.009) and involvement of several cartilages (HR 5.26; IC 95 % [1.17-23.6] p = 0.04) are prognostic factors for TL. Dyspnea caused by the tumour is a prognostic factor for reoperation (HR 2.59; IC 95 % [1.04-6.45] p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that conservative treatment should be considered as first-line treatment for laryngeal chondrosarcoma.

Functional and oncological outcomes of salvage transoral robotic surgery: a comparative study.

PURPOSE: Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) as a first-line therapy has been well-documented but evidence is missing regarding salvage therapy. The aim of this study is to compare the oncological and functional outcomes of TORS as a primary and salvage therapy. METHODS: This retrospective monocentric study included 74 patients operated by a single surgeon and sorted out into two groups: primary treatment (PT) or Salvage treatment (ST) in case of previous history of radiation therapy. Patients were further stratified by tumour location: larynx and pharynx (lST vs lPT and pST vs pPT). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included in PT group (64.9%) and 26 in ST group (35.1%). ST patients had more frequent cTis/T1 tumours (57.7% vs 29.2%, p = 0.0164) and no clinical lymph disease (3.8% vs 37.5%, p = 0.0016). Tracheostomy was more often performed in the ST group (57.7% vs 16.7%, p = 0.0003) and the lST subgroup (88.9% vs 9.1%, p < 0.0001). Gastric feeding tube placement was more frequent in the ST group (76.9% vs 33.3%, p = 0.0003), the pST subgroup (64.7% vs 15.4%, p = 0.0009) and the lST subgroup (100% vs 54.5%, p = 0.0297). We observed a trend for more postoperative complications in the ST group (69.2% vs 47.9%, p = 0.0783). The overall survival was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0004), and in the pST subgroup (p < 0.0001). The disease-free survival rate was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0001), the pST subgroup (p = 0.0002) and the lST subgroup (p = 0.0328). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that survival and functional outcomes after salvage TORS are worse than in first line surgery.