An approach to evaluate the quality of radiological reports in Head and Neck cancer loco-regional staging: experience of two Academic Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the quality of the reports of loco-regional staging computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in head and neck (H&N) cancer. METHODS: Consecutive reports of staging CT and MRI of all H&N cancer cases from 2018 to 2020 were collected. We created lists of quality indicators for tumor (T) for each district and for node (N). We marked these as 0 or 1 in the report calculating a report score (RS) and a maximum sum (MS) of each list. Two radiologists and two otolaryngologists in consensus classified reports as low quality (LQ) if the RS fell in the percentage range 0-59% of MS and as high quality (HQ) if it fell in the range 60-100%, annotating technique and district. We evaluated the distribution of reports in these categories. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-seven reports (97 CT and 140 MRI) of 95 oral cavity, 52 laryngeal, 47 oropharyngeal, 19 hypo-pharyngeal, 14 parotid, and 10 nasopharyngeal cancers were included. Sixty-six percent of all the reports were LQ for T, 66% out of all the MRI reports, and 65% out of all CT reports were LQ. Eight-five percent of reports were HQ for N, 85% out of all the MRI reports, and 82% out of all CT reports were HQ. Reports of oral cavity, oro-nasopharynx, and parotid were LQ, respectively, in 76%, 73%, 100% and 92 out of cases. CONCLUSION: Reports of staging CT/MRI in H&N cancer were LQ for T description and HQ for N description.

Treatment outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and transoral robotic surgery in locoregionally advanced laryngopharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify the optimal indications of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and transoral robotic surgery (TORS) in patients with locoregionally advanced (T3-4 or N2-3) head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: A total of 50 patients were included in the study. RESULTS: T1 was identified in seven cases, T2 in 19, T3 in 22, and T4 in 2. N0 was identified in nine cases, N1 in 18, N2 in 22, and N3 in 1. There were 25 patients (50%) with complete remission of the primary lesion and 25 patients (50%) with partial remission. On pathologic examination of surgical specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and TORS, 2 patients (4%) had a positive surgical margin, and 48 patients (96%) had a negative margin. Pathologic metastatic lymph nodes (LNs) were not observed in 39 cases (78%), and one metastatic LN was observed in 11 cases (22%). The 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) of all patients was 85.4%. On multivariate analysis, lymphovascular invasion showed a significant correlation with RFS. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with locoregionally advanced HNC, NACT and TORS achieved favorable oncologic and functional outcomes.

Microendoscopic Surgery of Middle Ear and Petrous Bone: Benefits Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopy has become routinely used in middle ear surgery. The aim of this study is to analyze where this tool may complement the traditional microscopic approach. This is a retrospective study done in single tertiary hospital. METHODS: We reviewed 342 middle ear/petrous bone surgical procedures performed between 2005 and 2015. Only cases in which both microscopic and endoscope-assisted techniques were used have been included. Sixty-six patients received this double-technique surgery: 51 (77.2%) had middle ear/mastoid and petrous bone cholesteatomas (46 middle ear and mastoid and 5 acquired/congenital petrous bone cholesteatomas), 5 (7.5%) had glomus tympanicum tumors (GTT), 4 (6%) had an ossicular chain dislocation, 3 (4.5%) had purulent chronic otitis media, 2 (3%) had tympanosclerosis, and 1 (1.5%) had an ossicular chain malformation. RESULTS: The endoscope was helpful to remove disease remnants not accessible by microscope in 41 (62%) of the cases; 37 (90%) were cholesteatomas, 3 (7%) were GTT, and only 1 (3%) was an open tympanosclerosis. In the remaining 25 (37.8%) cases, the endoscope was useful only to visualize the cavity since the microscope had already been successful in removing the entire lesion. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopy can add valuable information and support to the usual microscope approach alone. The consensus of a single best technique does not yet exist, but the physician should choose the best modality or combination of modalities in order to cure the patient and prevent any possible complications or recurrence of the pathology.

Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR Using Different Sample Sources: Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: The most widely used diagnostic technique for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). It can be done on different samples: nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) or oropharyngeal swabs (OPS), and self-collected saliva. However, negative findings do not rule out infection. METHODS: A review was conceived to discuss advantages and limitations of the available diagnostic modalities for nonserologic diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR; the article also proposes some practical suggestions to improve diagnostic reliability. RESULTS: A total of 16 papers (corresponding to 452 patients) of the 56 initially identified were included. Most of the papers describe findings from different samples obtained in limited case series; comparative studies are missing. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy of NPS and OPS is suboptimal and the risk of contaminated aerosol dispersal is not negligible. The SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be found in self-collected saliva specimens of many infected patients within 7 to 10 days after symptom onset. There is an urgent need for comparative trials to define the diagnostic modality of choice. Adequate education and training of health care personnel is mandatory.

Abscess of the clivus in an adolescent with complicated acute rhinosinusitis: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Complications of acute sinusitis affecting multiple sites are very uncommon, and generally develop for a delayed diagnosis of the primary infection, with possible severe and life-threatening evolution. Patients can have variable presentations according to the site and extent of the infection. Multiple forms generally include the coexistence of orbital manifestations and intracranial infections. We here present a case with unusual multiple sites locations (i.e.: intraorbital intraconic abscess, sigmoid sinus thrombosis, preclival abscess, multiple splanchnocranium osteomyelitic processes). CASE PRESENTATION: A 13-year-old male presented at our hospital with right progressive orbital oedema with eyesight worsening and signs of meningitis. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance (MRI) demonstrated right intraorbital intraconic abscess, left sphenoidal sinusitis, transverse and sigmoid sinus thrombosis. Ophthalmologic evaluation documented a right optic nerve sufferance. Endoscopic and superior right trans-palpebral surgical decompression was performed, and the abscess was drained. Microbiological analysis revealed the presence of multi-sensitive Streptococcus Intermedius. Subsequent prolonged antibiotic and anti-thrombotic treatments were started. In the following two-weeks the sinusal and ophthalmologic clinical conditions improved, whereas the patients complained of mild to moderate cervical pain and suffered from intermittent pyrexia. Control MRI documented clival abscess extending up to preclival soft tissues posterior to the nasopharynx, associated with mandible osteomyelitis, occipital condyles and anterior part of the temporal bone hyper intensity. Endoscopic trans-nasal surgical approach to the clival compartment with neurosurgery navigation-guided achieved preclival abscess drainage. Complete clinical and radiological recovery was achieved after 45 days of medical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple sites complicated rhinosinusitis is uncommon, and its management is challenging. A proper history and thorough clinical examination along with a radiological evaluation are key factors in the final diagnosis of patients with complicated multiple sites acute rhinosinusitis. A quick multidisciplinary approach is always necessary to avoid unwanted life-threatening complications.

Nonserologic test for COVID-19: How to manage?

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Coranavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is currently based on real-time PCR (RT-PCR) performed on either nasopharyngeal (NPS) or oropharyngeal (OPS) swabs; saliva specimen collection can be used, too. Diagnostic accuracy of these procedures is suboptimal, and some procedural mistakes may account for it. METHODS AND RESULTS: The video shows how to properly collect secretions from the upper airways for nonserologic diagnosis of COVID-19 by nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), oropharyngeal swab (OPS), and deep saliva collection after throat-cleaning maneuver, all performed under videoendoscopic view by a trained ENT examiner. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend to perform NPS after elevation of the tip of the nose in order to reduce the risk of contamination from the nasal vestible, and to let it flow over the floor of the nasal cavity in parallel to the hard palate in order to reach the nasopharynx. Then the tip of the swab should be left in place for few seconds, and then rotated in order to achieve the largest absorption of nasopharyngeal secretions. Regards OPS, gentle anterior tongue depression should be used to avoid swab contamination from the oral cavity during collection of secretions from the posterior pharyngeal wall. These procedural tricks would enhance diagnostic reliability.