Midface Resection And Reconstruction In Head And Neck Oncology: A 20 Years Single Institution Experience

Background: Midface tumors are relatively uncommon as midface comprises less than 1% of all malignant tumors and incorporate a distinct group of lesions, with a high variety of histological types and biological behavior. The purpose of the study is to present our experience in managing patients with advanced midface tumors for a 20-year period.Materials & Methods: From January 2000 to May 2020, we performed 72 excisions and reconstructions in 36 patients where their medical records were reviewed by the head and neck oncology clinic. The commonest anatomical site of the primary was the maxilla in 19 patients and bilaterally in 5 patients. In 15 patients there was an orbital and anterior fossa extension. In 6 patients there was a parotid and middle ear extension and in 1 patient there was a lip involvement.Results: Surgical resection included maxillectomy in the majority of the cases in combination with orbital exenteration or orbitectomy and anterior fossa resection. In 8 cases parotidectomy and mastoidectomy/ core petrosectomy was performed. One patient was subjected to total petrosectomy. Reconstruction was performed with radial forearm osteocutaneous free flap in 4 cases, latissimus with scapular bone flap in one case, lengthening temporalis myoplasty in 19 cases, rectus femoris in one case and anterolateral thigh flap in 5 cases in combination with temporalis and vastus lateralis in one case respectively and bilateral karapandzic flap in 1 case. The patients were followed-up from 2005 to 2020. To date, 23 patients (63.8%) are disease free with no recurrences of the disease and 4.4% of all patients presented disease recurrence during the follow-up period.Conclusions: In conclusion midface resections are safely performed with a combination of microvascular and dynamic reconstruction of the face offering our patients quality of life improvement.Level of Evidence: Level V, therapeutic study

Midline Mandibulotomy Approach for Oral Cavity and Oropharynx Tumors: Long-Term Experience in a Single Institution

Purpose: To describe our clinical experience with the use of the midline mandibulotomy approach for oral cavity and oropharynx tumors.Methods: Charts were reviewed retrospectively for 67 consecutive patients who underwent mandibulotomies over a 15-year period (2002-2017) as part of their treatment for oral and oropharyngeal malignancies, with an average follow-up of 57.7 months.Results: Sixty-seven patients underwent a mandibulotomy. There were 59 males (88%) with a mean age of 56.9 years and eight females (12%) with a mean age 56.5 years. The approach was a midline mandibulotomy in 50 patients (74.6%), a paramedian mandibulotomy in 10 patients (14.9%), and a posterior mandibulotomy in seven (10.44%: angle 1 (1.5%), body 5 (7.5%), and ramus 1 (1.5%).In the group of patients undergoing median or paramedian mandibulotomies, adequate exposure of the lesion was achieved in all cases with a significant lower rate of complications (13,4%) (p<0.005) compared to the posterior mandibulotomy group (37,5%) .Conclusions: The results of the study confirm that the anterior mandibulotomy approach provides excellent exposure for oral and oropharyngeal tumors, with a significant lower complication rate compared to the posterior mandibulotomy approach.Until minimally invasive Robotic technology is not widespread, conventional techniques such as midline mandibulotomy approaches, with “modern-times” refinements still have their place in head and neck oncology surgery

Operating Room Waste Generated Across Otolaryngology Cases

ABSTRACT Background Hospital waste adds to the ecological footprint of the healthcare system, whereas inattention to recyclables may increase costs. The primary objective of this study was to assess the amount of recyclable and nonrecyclable intraoperative waste produced across representative otolaryngology surgical procedures. Methods Representative surgical cases across four otolaryngology subspecialties at a tertiary care military medical institution were prospectively identified. Waste was collected, divided, and weighed across two categories: recyclable and nonrecyclable. This study was performed in conjunction with a hospital-approved quality improvement project. Results The study included 22 otolaryngology surgeries performed across four otolaryngology subspecialties: facial plastics, pediatrics, otology, and head and neck oncology. Overall, 197.4 kg of waste was collected of which 40.2 kg (20%) was recyclable and 157.2 kg (80%) was nonrecyclable. An average of 1.8 kg of recyclable materials and 7.1 kg of nonrecyclable materials were collected per case. Conclusion This study supports that otolaryngology surgical procedures generate a significant amount of waste, a large component of which is recyclable. It highlights the need for proper disposal of this waste and the implementation of a recycling program at our institution with the potential for both ecologic and economic benefits.