Background: Nose reconstruction following resection of nasal carcinomas is controversial. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of surgical reconstruction versus prosthetic rehabilitation on patient quality of life (QOL). Design: This was a monocentric prospective study of patients diagnosed with nasal carcinoma from 2003 to 2013. QOL was evaluated using two organ-specific questionnaires (Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation [ROE] and the Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory-17 [FROI-17]) and a generic questionnaire, the Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). Material and Methods: Sixty-four patients were included. Patients completed the ROE, FROI-17, and SF-36 questionnaires after nasal reconstruction. Questionnaires were completed by 62.8% of the 51 alive patients. Results: Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 89.9%, disease-specific survival was 94.5%, and overall survival was 75.5% after five years according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Considering initial tumor stage, early stage patients had a significantly higher selfconfidence score in FROI-17 subgroup analysis. In contrast, advanced stage patients showed a significantly higher score for social functioning in SF-36. Prosthetically fitted patients scored highly on the ROE questionnaire showing a high degree of aesthetic satisfaction. Surgically reconstructed patients showed a high degree of self-confidence on the FROI-17 questionnaire. However, the organ-specific ROE and FROI-17 scores were not significantly different between patients who received surgical reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation after oncological resection. When comparing the rehabilitation method as a function of tumor stage, there was significantly better score for "physical functioning" in early stage surgically reconstructed patients in the SF-36, but no significant differences in organ-specific QOL. Conclusion: Surgical reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation after nasal cancer resection have the same effect on organ-and non-organ-specific QOL.
Objectives. The reconstruction after nasal skin cancer (NSC) resection is often practiced differently. The objective of this study is to evaluate the influence of patient-, tumor- and management-related factors on the role of surgery and choice of reconstruction.Methods. This was a monocentric retrospective study of patients who were diagnosed with a NSC (squamous cell or basal cell carcinoma) and suffered from an extended defect after ablative surgery between 2003 and 2013. Twenty-five patients were included. Tumors were staged using the Union for International Cancer Control (eighth edition) TNM classification for primary cutaneous skin cancer of the head and neck. Preferred treatment was surgery in all patients. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measurement was evaluated by one generic (36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]) and two organ-specific questionnaires (Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation [ROE] and Functional Rhinoplasty Outcome Inventory 17 [FROI-17]) after therapy. Survival data were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and statistical analysis was performed by log-rank, analysis of variance, Levene’s and t-tests. The median follow-up time was 2.1 years.Results. According to the Union for International Cancer Control classification, 13 of 25 tumors were staged as pT1 (52%), four as pT2 (16%), seven as pT3 (28%) and one as pT4a (4%). Seventy-two percent of patients (n=18) chose plastic reconstruction, and for the remaining 28% (n=7) of the patients opted for an implant-retained prosthesis. The overall survival was 69.5% after 5 years, the 5-year recurrence-free survival was 90.9% and the 5-year disease-specific survival was 100%. There was no significant difference in the HRQoL outcome between both rehabilitation methods.Conclusion. Surgery in NSC gives an excellent oncologic prognosis. Nasal reconstruction and prostheses are both very viable options depending on tumor stage and biology, the patient’s wishes as well as the experience of the surgeon.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.