The Laryngoscope · 2004
Facial translocation approach in the management of central skull base and infratemporal tumors.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Suárez Carlos, Llorente José L, Muñoz Cristina, García Luis A, Rodrigo Juan P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The objectives were to systematize the indications of various types of facial translocation and to present a technical modification to avoid some sequelae of this approach.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis was made of patients treated with different types of facial translocation approach to resect nasopharyngeal, infratemporal, and sinonasal tumors.
METHODS: Thirty-nine patients underwent facial translocation approaches for neoplasms originally involving the nasopharynx (27) infratemporal fossa (7), and nasal cavity (5). Of the 21 malignant tumors, 2 were stage T2, 5 were stage T3, and 14 were stage T4. From the entire series of patients, 10 received a unilateral medial translocation, 3 a bilateral medial translocation, 25 a standard facial translocation, and 1 an extended medial facial translocation.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients (38%) developed some kind of complication, such as wound infection (nine cases) and osteomyelitis and cerebrospinal fluid leak (five cases each). Two patients died as a result of postoperative complications (5.2%). Overall 5-year survival for malignant tumors was 43%. Neither the histological appearance of the tumor nor the T stage influenced the survival of patients. Survival of patients with intracranial involvement was significantly decreased compared with patients with involvement of other areas (P =.0003).
CONCLUSION: The facial translocation approach offers an excellent exposure in tumors with large degree of involvement of the nasopharynx, infratemporal fossa, nasal cavity, and maxillary sinus. More limited osteotomies are indicated in smaller tumors. The use of midfacial degloving minimizes the number of sequelae of these approaches.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis was made of patients treated with different types of facial translocation approach to resect nasopharyngeal, infratemporal, and sinonasal tumors.
METHODS: Thirty-nine patients underwent facial translocation approaches for neoplasms originally involving the nasopharynx (27) infratemporal fossa (7), and nasal cavity (5). Of the 21 malignant tumors, 2 were stage T2, 5 were stage T3, and 14 were stage T4. From the entire series of patients, 10 received a unilateral medial translocation, 3 a bilateral medial translocation, 25 a standard facial translocation, and 1 an extended medial facial translocation.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients (38%) developed some kind of complication, such as wound infection (nine cases) and osteomyelitis and cerebrospinal fluid leak (five cases each). Two patients died as a result of postoperative complications (5.2%). Overall 5-year survival for malignant tumors was 43%. Neither the histological appearance of the tumor nor the T stage influenced the survival of patients. Survival of patients with intracranial involvement was significantly decreased compared with patients with involvement of other areas (P =.0003).
CONCLUSION: The facial translocation approach offers an excellent exposure in tumors with large degree of involvement of the nasopharynx, infratemporal fossa, nasal cavity, and maxillary sinus. More limited osteotomies are indicated in smaller tumors. The use of midfacial degloving minimizes the number of sequelae of these approaches.