Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_4547_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
25 Мб
Скачать
The Post-Operative Pharynx and Larynx 457
https://t.me/med1917
Engelke W et al (1991) Elektromagnetische Artikulographie:
Eine neue Methode zur Untersuchung von Bewegungsfunk-
tionen des Gaumensegels. Folia Phoniatr 43:147–152 Furia CL,Carrara-de AngelisE,MartinsNM,BarrosAP,CarneiroB,
Kowalski LP (2000) Videofluoroscopic evaluation after glos-
sectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 126:378–383 Gates GA (1980) Upper esophageal sphincter: pre- and postlar-
yngectomy—a normative study. Laryngoscope 90:454–464 Gay I, Crisin R, Elidan J (1984) Myotomy of the cricophar-
yngeal muscle. A treatment for dysphagia and aspiration in
neurological disorders. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord)
105:271–274 Groher M (1992) Dysphagia—diagnosis and management, 2nd
edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston Hannig C (1995) Functional fluoroscopic diagnosis of pharynx
and esophagus. Springer, Berlin Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A (1987) Stellenwert der Hochfre-
quenzkinematographie in der Diagnostik des Pharynx und
Ösophagus. Röntgenpraxis 40:358–377 Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A (1992) Cineradiography in pre-
and postoperative evaluation of cleft patients. In: 6th
Annual Meeting of the European Society of Head and
Neck Radiology. Karlsruhe, Oct. 7–10 Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A (1999) Radiological functional
diagnosis of swallowing disorders in neuological diseases and
in posttherapeuticoncologicalENT-diseases.In:BartologmeG,
Buchholz DW, Feussner H,HannigC,NeumannS,ProsiegelM,
Schöter-Morasch H, Wuttge-Hannig A (eds) Schluckstörungen
Diagnostik undRehabilitation Hrsg,2nd edn. Urban und Fischer
Verlag, München, pp 65–110 Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A, Hörmann M, Herrmann IF (1989)
Kinematographische Untersuchungen des Pathomechanis-
mus der Aspirationspneumonie. ROFO Fortschr Geb
Rontgenstr Nuklearmed 150:260–267 Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A, Clasen B, Kellermann S,
Volkmer C (1991) Dysphagia of the treated laryngeal
cancer—detection of functional and morphological changes
by cineradiography. Bildgebung Imaging 58:141–145 Hannig C, Feussner H, Stein H (1993a) Cineradiography and
radiomanometry in the pre- and postoperative evaluation of
cricopharyngeal dysfunction. Scientific Programme and
Abstracts, ECR 93. Springer International 1993:111 Hannig C,Wuttge-HannigA,Daschner H, Sader R(1993b) Pre-and
postoperative evaluation of cleft-patients by cineradiographic
imaging. ScientificProgrammeand Abstracts, ECR93.Springer
International 273 HannigC, SteinH, Wuttge-Hannig A, Hess U(1994) Diagnosis of
cricopharyngeal dysfunctionusing simultaneousvideomanom-
etry and cinemanometry. In: 3rd Annual dysphagia research
society meeting, Oct 14–16, 1994 McLean, Virginia, USA Hannig C, Hess U, Sader R, Sinz J (1995a) Einfluss des
velopharyngealen Abschlusses auf die OP-planung. In:
Symposium ‘‘Moderne Chirurgi der Kieferfehlstellungen’’.
Klinik und Poliklinik für Mund-Kiefer-Gesichtschirurgie,
Technische Universität München, März 24–25 Hannig C, Wuttge-Hannig A, Hess U (1995b) Analyse und
radiologisches Staging des Typs und Schweregrades einer
Aspiration. Der Radiologe 35:741–746 Hannig C, Hess U, Wuttge-Hannig A, Volkmer C (1996)
Dysphagie nach Laryngektomie—morphologische versus
funktionelle Veränderungen. ROFO Fortschr Geb Ron­tgenstr Nuklearmed Suppl 164:95
Hartmann H et al (1972) Zur Frage der Intelligenz und sozialen
Entwicklung von Kindern mit Lippen-, Kiefer-Gaumen­spalten. Prax Kinderpsychol Kinderpsychiatr 21:1–10
Herzog M et al (1993) Röntgenbefunde nach sekundärer bzw
tertiärer Osteoplastik bei Lippen-Kiefer-Gaumen-Spalten. Fortschr Kiefer Gesichtschir 38:64–66
Hess U, Hannig C, Sader R, Cavallaro A, Wuttge-Hannig A,
Zeilhofer H (1994) Assessment of the velopharyngeal closure with high-frequence-cineradiography for preopera­tive planning of maxillary advancement, ICHNR, Washing­ton, June 15–19.
Hess U,HannigC,WeissW,SaderR,ZeilhoferH, Wuttge-Hannig A,
Merl T (1995a) Die Videokinematographie in der prä- und postoperativen Diagnostik der Lippen-Kiefer-Gaumen-Spalte. Radiologe 35:712–715
Hess U, Hannig C, Weiss W, Sader R, Zeilhofer HF, Wuttge-
Hannig A, Merl T (1995b) Die Videokinematographie in der prä- und postoperativen Diagnostik der Lippen-Kiefer­Gaumenspalten. Radiologe 35:712–715
Hess U, Hannig C, Cavallaro A, Sader R (1996a) Die
postoperative Kontrolle der seskundären Velopharyngoplas­tik mit Hilfe der Kinematographie. 77. Deutscher Röntgen­kongress, Mai 15–18, 1996, Wiesbaden. ROFO Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed 164:95
Hess U, Hannig C, Sader R, Cavallaro A, Wuttge-Hannig A,
Zeilhofer H (1996b) Die Bewertung des velopharyngealen Verschlusses zur präoperativen Planung der Obe­rkiefervorverlagerung. Röntgenpraxis 49:25–26
Horch HH et al (1993) Klinische Ergebnisse nack sekundärer
Kieferspaltosteoplastik im Wechselgebiss für Lippen-Kie­fer-Gaumenspalten. Fortschr Kiefer Gesichtschir 38:61–64
Isberg A (1990) Radiographic examination of velopharyngeal
function. In: Delbaso A (ed) Maxillofacial imaging. Saun­ders, Philadelphia
Jung TK, Adams GL (1980) Dysphagia in laryngectomised
patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 88:25–33
Kennedy JG, Kent RD (1988) Physiological substrates of
normal deglutition. Dysphagia 3:24–38
Lazarus CL, Logemann JA, Pauloski BR, Rademaker AW,
Larson CR, Mittal BB, Pierce M (2000) Swallowing and tongue function treatment for oral and oropharyngeal cancer. J Speech Lang Hear Res 43:1011–1023
Leonard JR, Kendall KA, Johnson R, McKenzie S (2001)
Swallowing in myotonic muscular dystrophy: a videofluoro­scopic study. NY State Dent J 82:979–985
Logemann JA, Gibbons P, Rademaker AW, Pauloski BR,
Kahrilas PJ, Bacon M, Bowman J, McCracken E (1994) Mechanism of recovery of swallow after supraglottic laryngectomy. J Speech Hear Res 37:965–974
Mahieu HF (1996) Aspiration in the late pharyngeal phase:
UES dysfunction or defective laryngeal mobility? In: 2nd International symposium on laryngeal and tracheal recon­struction, Mai 22–26, 1996, Monte Carlo Proceedings, p 33
Martin BJ, Schleicher MA, O’Connor A (1993) Management of
dysphagia following supraglottic laryngectomy. Clin Com­mun Disord 3:27–36
Mills CP (1973) Dysphagia in pharyngeal paralysis treated by
cricopharyngeal sphincterotomy. Lancet 1:455–457
458 A. Wuttge-Hannig and C. Hannig
https://t.me/med1917
PastoreA,MarcheseRagonaR,DeGrandisD (1997)Ilruolo della
tossina botulinica nelle turbe dello sfintere esofageosuperiore.
Corso intensivo teorico-pratico: Diagnostica e terapia die
disturbi della deglutitzione. Milano 30–31.10.1997 (abstract
book, pp 20–25) Pauloski BR, Rademaker AW, Logemann JA, Lazarus CL, New-
man L, Hamner A, MacCracken E, Gaziano J, Stachowiak L
(2002) Swallow function and perception of dysphagia in patients
with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 24:555–565 Ren YF,IsbergA, Henningsson G(1993)Interactive influence of
a pharyngeal flapandadenoidonmaxillofacialgrowthincleft
lip and palate patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 30:144–149 Rosen A,RheeTH,Kaufman R (2001)Predictionof aspiration in
patients with newly diagnosed untreated advanced head and
neck cancer.ArchOtolaryngolHead Neck Surg 127:975–979 Rubesin SE, Jones B, Donner MW (1987) Radiology of the
adult soft palate. Dysphagia 2:8–17 Sader R,Horch HH,Herzog M, ZeilhoferHF, HannigC, Hess U,
Bünte E, Böhme G (1994) Hochfrequenz-Videokinematog-
raphie zur objektiven Darstellung des velopharyngealen
Verschlussmechanismus bei Gaumenspaltenpatienten.
Fortschr Kieferorthop 55:169–175 Sader R, Horch HH, Zeilhofer HF, Deppe H, Hannig C, Hess U
(1995) High-frequency cineradiography for objective three
dimensional rendering of velopharyngeal closure in cleft
patients. In: Kärcher H (ed) Functional surgery of the head
and neck. RM-Druck u Verl, Graz, pp 31–36 Sader R,ZeilhoferHF, HorchHH(1997)Maxillaryadvancement and
velopharyngeal closure in cleft patients. In: Lee ST, Huang M
(eds) Transaction 8th International congress on cleft palate and
related anomalies.StamfordPressPteLtd,Singapore, pp651–654
Sader R,ZeilhoferHF, Dietz M,Bressmann T, Hannig C,Putz R,
Horch HH (2001) Levatorplasty, a new technique to treat hypernasality: anatomical investigations and preliminary clinical results. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 29:143–149
Skolnick ML (1989) Videofluoroscopic studies of speech in
patients with cleft palate. Springer, Berlin
Thumfarth WF, Potoschnig C, Dapunt U, Nekahm D (1996)
Diagnostic and surgical systems for management of aspiration and swallowing disturbances. In: 2nd Interna­tional symposium on laryngeal and tracheal reconstruction, Monte Carlo Proceedings, p 31
Walther EK, Rodel R, Deroover M (1990) Rehabilitation of
deglutition in patients with pharyngeal carcinoma. Laryn­gorhinootologie 69:360–368
Wuttge-Hannig A, Hannig C (1995) Radiologische Differen-
tialdiagnose neurologisch bedingter Schluckstörungen. Der Radiologe 35:733–740
Wuttge-Hannig A, Hannig C (1999) Anatomy of swallowing In:
Bartologme G, Buchholz DW, Feussner H, Hannig C, Neumann S, Prosiegel M, Schöter-Morasch H, Wuttge-Hannig A (eds) Schluckstörungen Diagnostik und Rehabilitation Hrsg (2. Auflage). Urban und Fischer Verlag, München, pp 1–11
Wuttge-Hannig A, Beer A, Gebhardt A, Hellerhoff P, Wuttge R,
Hannig C (2001) Alternative methods for the diagnostic of deglutition. In: Schindler O, Ruoppolo G, Schindler A (eds) Deglutologie. Omega Edizioni
Zuydam AC, Rogers SN, Brown JS, Vaughan ED, Magennis R
(2000) Swallowing rehabilitation after oro-pharyngeal resection for squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:513–518
Dysphagia Evaluation and Treatment
https://t.me/med1917
After Head and Neck Surgery and/or Chemo-radiotherapy for Head and Neck Malignancies
Antonio Schindler, Francesco Mozzanica, and Filippo Barbiera
Contents
1 Introduction.............................................................. 460
2 Surgical Options for Head and Neck
Malignancies............................................................. 460
2.1 Surgery for the Oral Cavity Malignancies ............... 460
2.2 Surgery for Oro-Pharyngeal Malignancies ............... 462
2.3 Surgery for Laryngeal Malignancies ........................ 463
2.4 Surgery for Neck Metastasis ..................................... 468
3 Chemo-radiotherapy for Head and Neck
Malignancies............................................................. 468
3.1 Effects of Chemo-radiotherapy on Mucosa, Cartilage
and Muscles ............................................................... 469
3.2 Effects of Chemo-radiotherapy on Swallowing ....... 470
4 Evaluation of Swallowing and Swallowing
Disorder Complications after Surgery and/ or Chemo-radiotherapy of Head and Neck
Malignancies............................................................. 471
5 Treatment of Swallowing Disorders after Surgery
and/or Chemo-radiotherapy for Head and Neck
Malignancies............................................................. 472
References.......................................................................... 473
A. Schindler (&) F. Mozzanica Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences ‘‘L. Sacco’’, University of Milan, Via GB Grassi, 74 20157 Milan, Italy e-mail: antonio.schindler@unimi.it
F. Barbiera Unità Operativa di Radiologia ‘‘Domenico Noto’’, Azienda Ospedali Civili Riuniti ‘‘Giovanni Paolo II’’, 92019 Sciacca, Italy
Abstract
Tumors ofthe head and neck represent 3.2 % ofnewly diagnosed cancers; both surgery and chemo-radio­therapy are valid treatment options for head and neck cancer. In many head and neck cancer patients, dysphagia, malnutrition and aspiration pneumonia are found and significantly impact on quality of life. Dysphagia is related to the tumor itself, or conse­quences of its treatment. A large number of surgical procedures, according to tumor site and extension, patient age, and general conditions, have been devel­oped and are reviewed in this chapter. Swallowing disorders are related to both the surgical approach (open or endoscopic) and the tissue removed; while surgery for oral and oro-pharyngeal cancers mainly impact onoral control, oralperistalsis and mastication, partial laryngeal surgery interferes with airway pro­tection mechanisms, and complete laryngeal removal may be complicated with hypopharyngeal strictures. Different chemo-radiotherapy protocols are available nowadays and are reviewed here; dysphagia mayarise in the first two years or even many years afterwards and is mainly related to increased oro-pharyngeal transit time, reduced tongue and pharyngeal strength, restricted laryngealandhyoid elevation, poorvestibule and true vocal fold closure and possibly abnormal upper esophageal sphincter function. The primary treatment goal of dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients is maintaining functional oral feeding and preventing aspiration and thoracic complications. All patients treated for a head and neck cancers should have access to a dysphagia specialist and to an instrumental investigation in order to establish ade­quate treatment.
O. Ekberg (ed.), Dysphagia, Medical Radiology. Diagnostic Imaging, DOI: 10.1007/174_2012_606, Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012
459
460 A. Schindler et al.
https://t.me/med1917
1 Introduction
Tumors of the head and neck are not rare, representing
3.2 % of newly diagnosed cancer (Curado and Hashibe
2009). Incidence and prevalence may vary due to
several factors: geographical area, area within the head and neck , age, andtreatment. Bothsurgery and chemo­radiotherapy are valid treatment options for head and neck cancers andtheroles of these twoapproaches have changed considerably over time; in fact, the evolution of the treatment of head and neck cancers can be divi­ded into three main periods. The first was focused on curing patients using radical surgical procedures; the second was developed to preserve speech, using sound oncological principles. The final and current period is of organ-sparing protocols utilizing a combination of radiation, chemotherapy and surgery (Genden et al.
2007; Haigentz et al. 2009; Genden et al. 2010).
In many of the patients with head and neck cancer, dysphagia as well as its complications (malnutrition and aspiration pneumonia), are commonly found and significantly impacton health and quality of life (QOL) (Gallo et al. 2009; Manikantan et al. 2009; Schindler et al. 2006). Different factors may contribute to the presence of dysphagia: the tumor itself, the treatment and, in a small percentage of patients, associated dis­eases, such as Parkinson’s or stroke. Swallowing studies in patients with head and neck cancers revealed signs of dysphagia prior to treatment in up to 59 % of the population;pharyngeal tumorsappeared tobe more often associated with dysphagia compared to oropha­ryngeal or laryngeal tumors and swallowing function worsened significantly with increased tumor stage (Pauloski et al. 2000; Stenson et al. 2000; Van der Molen et al. 2009a). Appropriate management of dysphagia in this non-uniform population requires a team approach, with strict collaboration between various professions including surgeons, oncologists, radiotherapists, dentists, phoniatricians, speech and language pathologists, and dieticians; a precise under­standing ofthe disease, the treatment protocols, and the patient’s will are necessary before swallowing assess­ment and rehabilitation planning (SIGN 2006). In this chapter, only the main treatment options, for head and neck cancers, both surgical and non-surgical, are reviewed, with the aim of describing the impact on swallowing and the dysphagia management of these patients.
2 Surgical Options for Head
and Neck Malignancies
A large number of surgical procedures, according to tumor site and extension aswell as thepatient’s ageand general condition, have been developed over time to treat head and neck malignancies. Head and neck cancers are often treated with curative intent despite frequent presentation with advanced-stage disease, an intent thatmust be balanced with the potential for long­term morbidityfollowing aggressivelocal andregional therapies. Head andneck cancers areclassified as either ‘‘resectable,’’ or technically ‘‘unresectable,’’ due to regional invasion of critical structures; while ‘‘unre­sectable’’ tumors are often best treated with chemo­radiotherapy, several curative-intent treatment options currently exist forresectable tumors. Theadvantages of surgery as primary therapy include complete patho­logical staging for determination of patient prognosis as well as the potential for sparing some patients sub­sequent radiotherapy (RT), with or without chemo­therapy with its attendant toxicity. However, possible disadvantages of primary surgery include morbidity of the procedure, postoperativefunctional impairment, or, when the patient is not able to avoid postoperative treatment, the toxicity of both surgical and subsequent adjuvant therapy.
In most surgical procedures of the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx a tracheotomy is performed in order to prevent respiratory failure in case of oedema, upper airway obstruction or peri-operative bleeding. Appropriate management of the tracheotomy and of the cannula are required in order to restore swallow­ing in the best possible way.
2.1 Surgery for the Oral Cavity
Malignancies
The oral cavity extends from the lip to the junction of the hard and soft palate above and to the line of the circumvallate papillae below; therefore the regions of the oral cavity include buccal mucosa, upper and lower alveolar ridges, the retromolar trigone, the anterior two-thirds of the tongue, the floor of the mouth, and the hard palate. Surgical procedures for tumors of the oral cavity vary according to the site and the dimension of the tumor; while for tumors
Dysphagia Evaluation and Treatment After Head and Neck Surgery 461
https://t.me/med1917
to the tumor, and reconstruction. Depending on the site and extension of the tumor, the possible tongue resections are: marginal glossectomy (resection of one-quarter of the tongue), hemiglossectomy (resec­tion of half of the tongue along the midline), hemi­glossomandibulectomy (resection of half of the tongue and a portion of the mandible), and near total glossectomy.
After marginal glossectomy or hemiglossectomy, swallowing disorders are usually temporary and are mainly related to clumsiness in tongue movement and difficulties in triggering the swallowing re-flex. Clumsiness in tongue movement may impact on both control of material in the mouth and lingual peri­stalsis. When lingual resection exceeds 50 % of the tongue, effects on swallowing are more severe. In particular, lingual peristalsis and oral control may be severely reduced (Fig. 2a, b); patients’ diets may be restricted to liquids and thinned paste, and tilting of the head backward to allow gravity to carry material
Fig. 1 Schematic drawing of split-thickness brachial flap after
resection of half of the tongue and mouth floor
into the pharynx is often required.
\4 cm surgery can be the only treatment option, for larger tumors chemo-radiotherapy is usually pre­ferred. The challenge of surgery for malignancies of the oral cavity is to perform an adequate resection and then to provide the best functional reconstruction (de Bree et al. 2008). In fact, extensive surgical resections are often required, leading to major phys­ical defects that can-not be repaired by primary mucosal closure or skin grafting. Surgical recon­struction aims to repair the physical deficit, while restoring functional deficits. Reconstruction tech­niques are diverse and vary by anatomical region. Split-thickness skin grafts are the mainstay for small, superficial defects of the oral cavity (Fig. 1); the pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps provide soft tissue for large floor-of-mouth and tongue resections, while myocutaneous or osteomyocutaneous free flaps are the reconstructive methods of choice for oral cavity defects. The radial fore-arm flap is the most widely used free flap, while if bone is required for mandibular reconstruction fibula, iliac crest or scap­ula, free flaps can be used.
2.1.1 Glossectomies
Tongue cancer surgery may vary depending on three main variables: extension of tongue resection, access
2.1.2 Commando Procedures
The ‘‘commando procedure’’ (COMbined MANDib­ulectomy and Neck Dissection Operation) is a surgi­cal procedure for malignant tumors of the floor of the oral cavity, involving resection of portions of the mandible in continuity with the oral lesion and radical neck dissection. Segmental mandibulectomy is con­sidered only when there is gross invasion of the cancellous part of the bone by oral cancer, for primary bone tumors of the mandible, metastatic tumors of the mandible, invasion of inferior alveolar nerve or canal by tumor, and for massive soft-tissue disease around the mandible. In the other cases, since there are no lymphatic channels passing through the mandible, there is no need to perform an in-continuity composite resection of the uninvolved mandible; in order to gain access to the large primary oral cancer, a mandibul­otomy can be performed without the need to sacrifice the normal intervening mandible (Shah 2009).
Reconstructive surgery following resection for oral cancer is considered when there is functional or esthetic loss of structures in the oral cavity. Superfi­cial surgical defects of the mucosa and underlying soft tissues can be adequately reconstructed using a skin graft, while larger defects of the tongue exceeding one-half of the tongue or large surface areas of the floor of the mouth, gum and buccal
462 A. Schindler et al.
https://t.me/med1917
Fig. 2 Videofluoroscopic
images of a patient after hemiglossectomy; poor oral control with stasis in the floor of the mouth and spillage in the hypopharynx (a) as well as aspiration (b) are visible
mucosa, require a free-tissue transfer. A radial fore­arm free flap provides excellent tissue for resurfacing mucosal defects and underlying soft tissue deficien­cies. The radial forearm flap is also an excellent choice for reconstruction of any substantial resection of the tongue. Fibula free flap reconstruction is cur­rently the choice of reconstruction for defects fol­lowing segmental mandibulectomy in any part of the mandible. While other free flaps are available (from iliac crest, scapula and the radial forearm), the fibula provides the maximum length and bone stock to achieve a satisfactory reconstruction of the lower jaw.
After resection of the anterior floor of the mouth, swallowing is strictly related to surgical closure technique, but it is usually preserved. If the tongue is sutured into the surgical defect, however, impairment of control of the bolus and of lingual peristalsis and mastication will arise. After lateral mouth floor resection, severe swallowing impairment may arise if the base of the tongue is involved in the surgical procedure; lingual propulsion and oral transit time will be reduced and material will collect in the lateral sulcus and/or in the crevices.
2.2 Surgery for Oro-Pharyngeal
Malignancies
The oropharynx consists of four sections: the soft palate, tonsil, base of the tongue, and pharyngeal wall. The survival outcomes of therapy for these tumors remain essentially the same, regardless of the treat­ment combination employed. The most important factor affecting long-term outcome following initial
treatment of oro-pharyngeal cancer is the stage of disease at the time of presentation. In the past, surgery, followed by RT, was standard. However, at present, concurrent chemo-radiotherapy appears to be the preferred choice of therapy. Surgical intervention would be considered for tumors of minor salivary gland origin or squamous cell carcinoma that remains persistent after chemo-radiotherapy or recurs after chemo-radiotherapy. Surgical access to neoplasms of the oropharynx can be obtained via a mandibulotomy (Fig. 3), lateral pharyngotomy or transoral robotic surgery (TORS) (Weinstein et al. 2007). Early-stage tumors offer excellent cure rates; however, once regional lymph node metastases have taken place, a significant drop in the cure rate is to be expected. Early diagnosis and implementation of appropriate surgical treatment based on tumor and patient factors, selective management of regional lymph node metastases at risk, and involvement of multidisciplinary teams for implementation of adjuvant RT or chemo-radiother­apy, have all contributed to improvements in survival of patients with oral cancers in the last few decades. Contemporary surgical techniques of tumor resection and reconstruction are essential to improve the quality of life of patients following surgical resection due to oro-pharyngeal cancer.
Surgery for oro-pharyngeal tumors impact on both oral and pharyngeal stages of swallowing. Tongue propulsion will be reduced, and there may be nasal regurgitation as well as delayed or reduced triggering of the swallowing reflex and pharyngeal peristalsis, that lead to oral and pharyngeal residue. Occasion­ally, cricopharyngeal sphincter difficulties may also arise.
Dysphagia Evaluation and Treatment After Head and Neck Surgery 463
https://t.me/med1917
osteotomy, which is fixated at the end of the surgery. It provides the widest and most reliable access to the deep anatomy of the posterior oral cavity and oro­pharynx and lends exposure to virtually any site in the upper aerodigestive tract, including the nasopharynx, hypopharynx, parapharyngeal spaces, and clivus.
2.2.2 Lateral Pharyngotomy Access
Lateral pharyngotomy access is useful for smalltumors of the base of the tongue and pharyngeal walls. The pharynx is entered posterior to the thyroid ala on the least diseased side. Once in the pharynx, the larynx is retracted to the opposite side. This allows a good view of the posterior pharyngeal wall, opposite lateral wall, and base of tongue. If more superior exposure is nee­ded, the pharyngotomy can be extended across the vallecula or this approach can be combined with a lat­eral mandibulotomy.
2.2.3 Transoral Robotic Surgery
Robotic surgery is performed utilizing the da Vinci surgical system. The surgeon sits at the console and controlsmicromanipulators,whichinturnareconnected to a robotic cart at the patient’s bedside. In TORS, three arms are routinely utilized (Genden et al. 2009).
Fig. 3 Schematic drawing of transmaxillar-oropharyngecto-
my; the arrows indicate possible diffusione of the tumor
2.2.1 Mandibulotomy Access
Surgical access to the posterior oral cavity and oro­pharynx can be accomplished via a multitude of approaches, including pull-through glossotomy and pharyngotomy. In the pull-through technique, once the hypoglossal and lingual nerves are identified, the floor of the mouth mucosa and extrinsic tongue muscles are divided and the tongue is dropped into the neck (Fig. 4); when pharyngotomy is performed, neck dissection is associated and resection of the upper portion of the thyroid cartilage is necessary, before incision into the pharyngeal wall. The most widely used access is the mandibulomy, in particular the lip­splitting mandibulotomy approach. This involves a lower lip-splitting incision, followed by a mandibular
2.3 Surgery for Laryngeal Malignancies
The era of surgical treatment began in 1873 when Billroth first described the surgical procedure of total laryngectomy (TL), the ‘‘gold standard’’ for advanced­stage laryngeal carcinoma. Despite its efficacy as an oncologic procedure, complete loss of thelarynxis a de­vastating experience that results in significant diminu­tion of QOL for many individuals. The consequences of TL include loss of nasal function, poor cough, swal­lowingdifficulties, lung function changesand,aboveall, loss of the normal voice. Therefore, the challengeforthe head and neck surgeon has not been significantly improving the cure rate for laryngeal cancers because the survival data for the radical laryngectomy have remained quite constant when adjusted for tumor site and stage, but reducing the morbidity associated with the treatment (Dworkin et al. 2003;Levineetal.1997). Not surprisingly, the evolution in the management of laryngeal cancer has been toestablish surgicalas well as non-surgical protocols with overall survival equivalent to TL but better QOL (Genden et al. 2007).
464 A. Schindler et al.
https://t.me/med1917
Fig. 4 Schematic drawing of
pull-through glossotomy
2.3.1 Partial Laryngectomies
There are several surgical options for treating lar­yngeal carcinoma, that allow resection of the tumor with oncologically safe margin and preserve laryngeal function. While fronto-lateral partial resections have been used in the past, horizontal partial laryngecto­mies are currently more popular; horizontal partial laryngectomies include supraglottic partial laryngec­tomy (SGL) and supracricoid laryngectomies (SCL).
Frontolateral vertical laryngectomy consists of a vertical laryngectomy with removal of the anterior commissure; a lateral thyrotomy is performed on both sides, the vocal fold with the anterior commissure is removed and the remaining vocal fold is sutured to the thyroid cartilage. SGL consists of resecting the whole supraglottic portion of the larynx, including both ventricular folds and the epiglottis (Fig. 5). Depending on the size and site of the tumor, SGL may be exten­ded into the base of the tongue or may include one arytenoid (Marandas et al. 1987). SCLs are conser­vative surgical techniques for the treatment of selected laryngeal carcinomas; two reconstruction techniques, cricohyoidoepiglottopexy (CHEP) and cricohyoi­dopexy (CHP) are used, depending on whether the epiglottis is preserved or not (Adamopoulos et al.
2000; Brasnu 2003; Labayle and Bismuth 1971;
Laccourreye et al. 1987, 1990, 1995, 1996; Levine et al. 1997; Piquet et al., 1974; Piquet and Chevalier
1991). In SCL, both ventricular and vocal folds as well
as the entire thyroid cartilage are resected, while at least one arytenoid cartilage is spared; in SCL with CHP (Fig. 6) the epiglottis and pre-epiglottic space are also resected, while in SCL with CHEP they are spared (Fig. 7). In the past few years, in addition to open SCL, endoscopic CO
laser SCLs have been devel-
2
oped; this surgical approach reduces anterior neck muscles and nerve involvement (Weinstein et al. 2007; Jong-Lyel et al. 2008). Volitional sphincteric approximation of the mobile arytenoids cartilage and base of tongue, in the case of CHP, or epiglottis, in the case if CHEP, allow neoglottal closure and airway protection (Fig. 8), (de Vincentiis et al. 1996, 1998; Luna-Ortiz et al. 2004; Naudo et al. 1997, 1998).
The advantage of partial laryngectomies over TL is that a permanent tracheostomy is not required since the main laryngeal functions (respiration, phonation and swallowing) are preserved, when at least one functioning cricoarytenoid joint is maintained, facili­tating neoglottal competency (Bron et al. 2000). Compensatory mechanisms with reorganization of the stepwise sequence of neuromuscular events, lasting several months, are necessary to restore swallowing (Woisard et al. 1996; Yuceturk et al. 2005). Satisfac­tory functional results of both voice and swallowing after partial laryngectomies have been reported by various authors (Crevier-Buchman et al. 1995, 1998; Zacharek et al. 2001); however, significant alterations have become inevitable and long-term outcome
Dysphagia Evaluation and Treatment After Head and Neck Surgery 465
https://t.me/med1917
Fig. 5 Schematic drawing of
horizontal sovraglottic laryngectomy
showed mild to moderate dysphagia in the majority of patients (Schindler et al. 2006, 2009). While vertical partial laryngectomy usually does not impact on swallowing, horizontal partial laryngecto­mies are associated with dysphagia mainly due to airway protection impairment, and they require appropriate management by a swallowing therapist; in all the reported case series, a small but significant percentage of patients developed aspiration pneumo­nia and a few did not achieve the ability to eat by mouth. Severity of dysphagia and recovery time are mainly related to amplitude of resection: after SGL swallowing recovers sooner than after SCL with CHP, but SGL extended to the base of the tongue is asso­ciated with more severe dysphagia compared to SGL. Insufficient laryngeal vestibule and/or glottis closure during the pharyngeal phase of swallowing is seen in all these patients, and appropriate laryngeal closure needs to be acquired after surgery (Rademaker et al.
1993). While upper airway protection deficit is the
main cause of dysphagia, other factors should be considered: superior laryngeal nerve function is often impaired, leading to a reduced laryngeal sensation; laryngeal elevation can also be damaged and upper
esophageal sphincter opening reduced. Finally, a delayed swallowing reflex is found in a significant percentage of patients (Fig. 9).
In the long term aspiration is found in about 40 % of patients who underwent SCL and who are by mouth feeded (Fig. 10); nonetheless, pulmonaryCTscans fail to find significant differences compared to COPD patients, suggesting that in this population, a mild chronic aspi­ration is well tolerated (Simonelli et al. 2010).
2.3.2 TL and Laryngopharyngectomy
TL is the widely accepted standard for surgical treat­ment of advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal tumors. TL includes removal of all laryngeal and associated structures, from the hyoid bone and the epiglottis superiorly to the tracheal rings inferiorly, with varying amounts of the hypopharynx and thyroid gland. It can be extended to the base of the tongue, pharynx andtrachea as well as prelaryngeal soft tissues including the skin (Fig. 11). Whenthe tumor originates in the hypopharynx or there is a hypopharyngeal extension of laryngeal carcinoma, a partial or total laryngopharyngectomy may beneeded.If the extension is limited, partial pharyngectomy is performed, while
466 A. Schindler et al.
https://t.me/med1917
Fig. 6 Schematic drawing of surpacricoid laryngectomy with crico-hyodo-pexy (CHP); only one arytenoid is spared
Fig. 7 Schematic drawing of
surpacricoid laryngectomy with crico-hyodo­epiglottopexy (CHEP)