Search

Objective In case of close or positive resection margins after oncological resection in head and neck surgery, additional treatment is necessary. When conventional options are exhausted, photodynamic therapy (PDT) can play a role in achieving clear margins. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the clinical benefit of PDT as adjuvant therapy next to surgery with positive resection margins. The role of the time interval between surgery and PDT on survival outcomes also was investigated. Study design Retrospective cohort analysis. Methods Adjuvant PDT was performed in patients with a malignancy in the head and neck region with close or positive resection margins who were not eligible for conventional treatment options. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival, overall survival, and optimal time interval between surgery and PDT. Results Fifty-four patients were treated with surgery followed by meta-tetrahydroxyphenylchlorin-mediated PDT. There was a large diversity in tumor location and histopathology, as well as in time interval between surgery and PDT. The 2-year progression-free survival rate was 30%; 2-year disease-free survival rate was 28%; and 2-year overall survival was 51%. Disease-free survival was significantly better when the time interval between surgery and PDT was ≥ 6 weeks (P = 0.02). Conclusion PDT can be applied as adjuvant therapy after surgery in cases of a malignancy with close or positive tumor resection margins. However, the clinical benefits are yet to be determined. There is a significantly better disease-free survival with a time interval between surgery and PDT of minimal 6 weeks. Level of evidence 4. Laryngoscope, 128:657-663, 2018.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the relative compliance and the dermatological and pulmonary outcomes when the Provox Luna system (Atos Medical, Malmö, Sweden) is added during the night to the usual tracheastoma care of laryngectomized subjects. Methods: This was a multicenter randomized crossover trial conducted in the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, and Maastricht University Medical Center in The Netherlands. The study included 46 laryngectomized subjects with prior heat and moisture exchanger (HME) and adhesive experience. Results: A significant improvement in the number of compliant individuals was found: Luna: n = 43 of 45 (96%); usual care: n = 35 of 46 (76%), P = 0.02. The Luna period was associated with longer intervals of daily HME use (Luna 23.2 hours [range: 15.6–24.0 hours], usual care [UC]: 21.5 hours [range: 6.0–24.0 hours], P = 0.003) and an increased frequency of skin improvement overnight (Luna 3.9 days [standard deviation (SD)]: 7.0 days), Usual Care: 8.1 days ([SD: 10.8 days], P = 0.008). Fifty-six percent (n = 26) of participants wanted to continue using the Provox Luna system at the conclusion of the study. Conclusion: An improvement in compliance and skin recovery overnight was observed when the Provox Luna was added to the usual adhesive and HME use. Therefore, there is utility in supplementing the usual post-total laryngectomy care with the Provox Luna system at night, particularly in the setting of compliance concerns and in subjects who desire dermatological relief overnight. Level of Evidence: 1b. Laryngoscope, 129:2354–2360, 2019.

Objectives/Hypothesis: To assess device life of the new Provox Vega 22.5 and 20 Fr prostheses, to establish whether the optimized airflow characteristics of these devices materialize in better voice characteristics in comparison to Provox2, and to assess the feasibility of voice prosthesis replacement with the new Smart Inserter. Study Design: Prospective clinical phase II study. Methods: Prospective clinical phase II study including two patient cohorts (Provox Vega 22.5 Fr: N = 33; Provox Vega 20 Fr: N = 26). Device-life assessment, subjective data collection with study-specific structured questionnaires, perceptual analysis (Comparative Mean Opinion Score), and objective voice analysis (standard Dutch text, maximum phonation time, and dynamic range). Results: Device life of both prostheses appears comparable to Provox2. Several voice characteristics were better in Vega 22.5, which coincides well with patients' preference. Voicing with Vega 20 appears comparable to Provox2. Use of Smart Inserter showed a short learning curve, and was considered an improvement by the clinicians. Conclusions: The new Provox Vega 22.5 and 20 Fr prostheses have a device life comparable to Provox2, whereas voicing is better than (with the 22.5Fr version) or comparable (with the 20 Fr version) to Provox2. The Smart Inserter, after a short learning curve, turns out to be a further improvement of the anterograde replacement of these indwelling devices.

To assess device life of the new Provox Vega 22.5 and 20 Fr prostheses, to establish whether the optimized airflow characteristics of these devices materialize in better voice characteristics in comparison to Provox2, and to assess the feasibility of voice prosthesis replacement with the new Smart Inserter.Prospective clinical phase II study.Prospective clinical phase II study including two patient cohorts (Provox Vega 22.5 Fr: N = 33; Provox Vega 20 Fr: N = 26). Device-life assessment, subjective data collection with study-specific structured questionnaires, perceptual analysis (Comparative Mean Opinion Score), and objective voice analysis (standard Dutch text, maximum phonation time, and dynamic range).Device life of both prostheses appears comparable to Provox2. Several voice characteristics were better in Vega 22.5, which coincides well with patients' preference. Voicing with Vega 20 appears comparable to Provox2. Use of Smart Inserter showed a short learning curve, and was considered an improvement by the clinicians.The new Provox Vega 22.5 and 20 Fr prostheses have a device life comparable to Provox2, whereas voicing is better than (with the 22.5 Fr version) or comparable (with the 20 Fr version) to Provox2. The Smart Inserter, after a short learning curve, turns out to be a further improvement of the anterograde replacement of these indwelling devices.

Previous studies have demonstrated the positive effect of a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) on the respiratory system in patients after laryngectomy. However, patient compliance with these devices was reduced by device-related problems and troublesome combination with a voice prosthesis. Recently a more specialized device has become available. This is an HME combined with a valve for easy digital occlusion of the stoma (Provox Stomafilter; Horby, Sweden). In the authors' initial study of this revised device, a clear improvement in short-term compliance was demonstrated. To investigate long-term compliance, 69 consecutive patients were interviewed by means of a structured questionnaire. The results show that all patients expressed their satisfaction with the valve used for digital occlusion of the stoma. Sixty-three percent of the patients reported that voicing was facilitated. Subjective intelligibility improved in 55% of the patients. Previous problems with other devices (e.g., plaster adherence, skin irritation, and handling) were clearly diminished, increasing the long-term compliance of the patients to 78%. This new HME can be considered as a beneficial pulmonary rehabilitation tool for laryngectomized patients.