Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature

Àlvar Roselló; Rui Albuquerque; Xavier Roselló-Llabrés; Antonio Marí-Roig; Albert Estrugo-Devesa; José López-López

doi:10.4317/medoral.23632

Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature

Àlvar Roselló, Rui Albuquerque, Xavier Roselló-Llabrés, Antonio Marí-Roig, Albert Estrugo-Devesa, José López-López^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Centre for Oral, Clinical & Translational Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: TORS has become one of the latest surgical alternatives in the treatment of oropharynx squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) and has become increasingly accepted by surgeons as a treatment option. Surgical ro-bots were designed for various purposes, such as allowing remote telesurgery, and eliminating human factors like trembling. The study aimed to compare systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) compared with open surgery. Material and Methods: We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TORS compared with open surgery. We compared TORS and open surgery based on 16 outcomes divided in to 3 groups: intra-operative complications, post-operative complications, and functional and oncologic outcomes. An electronic search of observational studies was carried out using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Reg-ister, and Scielo. Data analysis was carried out in accordance to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) and the quality of the studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No language restrictions were imposed. Results: From the 4 studies identified (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale mean score 6.5), 371 patients were revised (186 patients were treated with TORS and 185 with conventional surgery). Overall, TORS, when compared with open surgery, appears to have better functional results (less hospital time, decannulation) and fewer intraoperative and post-operative complications. There is no significant difference when assessing the oncological outcomes (positive margins, survival rate) when comparing both techniques. Conclusions: TORS has an overall better functional outcome, and less intraoperative and postoperative complications with no difference in positive margins and survival rate when compared with conventional therapy.

Original language	English
Article number	23632
Pages (from-to)	e599-e607
Journal	Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal
Volume	25
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.23632
Publication status	Published - 2020

Keywords

Conventional surgery
Head and neck cancer
Open surgery
Oral cancer
TORS
Transoral Robotic Surgery

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.4317/medoral.23632

Cite this

@article{34f46d4a3e314a78aecaf9f727c65299,

title = "Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature",

abstract = "Background: TORS has become one of the latest surgical alternatives in the treatment of oropharynx squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) and has become increasingly accepted by surgeons as a treatment option. Surgical ro-bots were designed for various purposes, such as allowing remote telesurgery, and eliminating human factors like trembling. The study aimed to compare systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) compared with open surgery. Material and Methods: We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TORS compared with open surgery. We compared TORS and open surgery based on 16 outcomes divided in to 3 groups: intra-operative complications, post-operative complications, and functional and oncologic outcomes. An electronic search of observational studies was carried out using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Reg-ister, and Scielo. Data analysis was carried out in accordance to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) and the quality of the studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No language restrictions were imposed. Results: From the 4 studies identified (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale mean score 6.5), 371 patients were revised (186 patients were treated with TORS and 185 with conventional surgery). Overall, TORS, when compared with open surgery, appears to have better functional results (less hospital time, decannulation) and fewer intraoperative and post-operative complications. There is no significant difference when assessing the oncological outcomes (positive margins, survival rate) when comparing both techniques. Conclusions: TORS has an overall better functional outcome, and less intraoperative and postoperative complications with no difference in positive margins and survival rate when compared with conventional therapy.",

keywords = "Conventional surgery, Head and neck cancer, Open surgery, Oral cancer, TORS, Transoral Robotic Surgery",

author = "{\`A}lvar Rosell{\'o} and Rui Albuquerque and Xavier Rosell{\'o}-Llabr{\'e}s and Antonio Mar{\'i}-Roig and Albert Estrugo-Devesa and Jos{\'e} L{\'o}pez-L{\'o}pez",

year = "2020",

doi = "10.4317/medoral.23632",

language = "English",

volume = "25",

pages = "e599--e607",

journal = "Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal",

issn = "1698-4447",

publisher = "Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral y Cirugia Bucal",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature

AU - Roselló, Àlvar

AU - Albuquerque, Rui

AU - Roselló-Llabrés, Xavier

AU - Marí-Roig, Antonio

AU - Estrugo-Devesa, Albert

AU - López-López, José

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - Background: TORS has become one of the latest surgical alternatives in the treatment of oropharynx squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) and has become increasingly accepted by surgeons as a treatment option. Surgical ro-bots were designed for various purposes, such as allowing remote telesurgery, and eliminating human factors like trembling. The study aimed to compare systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) compared with open surgery. Material and Methods: We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TORS compared with open surgery. We compared TORS and open surgery based on 16 outcomes divided in to 3 groups: intra-operative complications, post-operative complications, and functional and oncologic outcomes. An electronic search of observational studies was carried out using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Reg-ister, and Scielo. Data analysis was carried out in accordance to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) and the quality of the studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No language restrictions were imposed. Results: From the 4 studies identified (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale mean score 6.5), 371 patients were revised (186 patients were treated with TORS and 185 with conventional surgery). Overall, TORS, when compared with open surgery, appears to have better functional results (less hospital time, decannulation) and fewer intraoperative and post-operative complications. There is no significant difference when assessing the oncological outcomes (positive margins, survival rate) when comparing both techniques. Conclusions: TORS has an overall better functional outcome, and less intraoperative and postoperative complications with no difference in positive margins and survival rate when compared with conventional therapy.

AB - Background: TORS has become one of the latest surgical alternatives in the treatment of oropharynx squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCC) and has become increasingly accepted by surgeons as a treatment option. Surgical ro-bots were designed for various purposes, such as allowing remote telesurgery, and eliminating human factors like trembling. The study aimed to compare systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) compared with open surgery. Material and Methods: We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TORS compared with open surgery. We compared TORS and open surgery based on 16 outcomes divided in to 3 groups: intra-operative complications, post-operative complications, and functional and oncologic outcomes. An electronic search of observational studies was carried out using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Reg-ister, and Scielo. Data analysis was carried out in accordance to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) and the quality of the studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No language restrictions were imposed. Results: From the 4 studies identified (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale mean score 6.5), 371 patients were revised (186 patients were treated with TORS and 185 with conventional surgery). Overall, TORS, when compared with open surgery, appears to have better functional results (less hospital time, decannulation) and fewer intraoperative and post-operative complications. There is no significant difference when assessing the oncological outcomes (positive margins, survival rate) when comparing both techniques. Conclusions: TORS has an overall better functional outcome, and less intraoperative and postoperative complications with no difference in positive margins and survival rate when compared with conventional therapy.

KW - Conventional surgery

KW - Head and neck cancer

KW - Open surgery

KW - Oral cancer

KW - TORS

KW - Transoral Robotic Surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090039529&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4317/medoral.23632

DO - 10.4317/medoral.23632

M3 - Review article

C2 - 32683380

AN - SCOPUS:85090039529

SN - 1698-4447

VL - 25

SP - e599-e607

JO - Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal

JF - Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal

IS - 5

M1 - 23632

ER -

Transoral robotic surgery vs open surgery in head and neck cancer. A systematic review of the literature

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this