Next Article in Journal
Lenalidomide in Multiple Myeloma—A Practice Guideline
Previous Article in Journal
Impact of a Single-Day Multidisciplinary Clinic on the Management of Patients with Liver Tumours
 
 
Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Role of Endolaryngeal Surgery (with or without Laser) Compared with Radiotherapy in the Management of Early (T1) Glottic Cancer: A Clinical Practice Guideline

1
Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada
2
Cancer Care Ontario, Program in Evidence-Based Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
3
Department of Radiation Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada
4
Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery/Surgical Oncology, Wharton Head and Neck Program, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2013, 20(2), 132-135; https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1237
Submission received: 1 January 2013 / Revised: 1 February 2013 / Accepted: 1 March 2013 / Published: 1 April 2013

Abstract

Aims: To provide evidence-based practice guideline recommendations concerning the role of endolaryngeal surgery (with or without laser) compared with radiation therapy for patients with early (T1) glottic cancer, assessing survival, locoregional control, laryngeal preservation rates, and voice outcomes. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify relevant studies from 1996 to 2011. Recommendations were formulated based on that evidence and on the expert opinion of Cancer Care Ontario’s Head and Neck Cancer disease site group. The systematic review and practice guideline were externally reviewed by practitioners in Ontario, Canada. Results: The available evidence was of a level insufficient to demonstrate a clear difference between treatment options when considering the likelihood of local control or overall survival. Although the evidence was mainly retrospective, there was a suggestion that, compared with surgery, radiotherapy might be associated with less measureable perturbation of voice without a significant difference in patient perception. The likelihood of laryngeal preservation may be higher when surgery can be offered as initial treatment. Conclusions: For patients with early (T1) glottic cancer, the evidence is insufficient to demonstrate a difference between endolaryngeal surgery (with or without laser) and external-beam radiation therapy. The choice between treatment modalities has been based on patient and clinician preferences and general medical condition.
Keywords: endolaryngeal; glottic; radiotherapy; surgery; T1 endolaryngeal; glottic; radiotherapy; surgery; T1

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yoo, J.; Lacchetti, C.; Hammond, J.A.; Gilbert, R.W.; , Neck Cancer Disease Site Group. Role of Endolaryngeal Surgery (with or without Laser) Compared with Radiotherapy in the Management of Early (T1) Glottic Cancer: A Clinical Practice Guideline. Curr. Oncol. 2013, 20, 132-135. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1237

AMA Style

Yoo J, Lacchetti C, Hammond JA, Gilbert RW, Neck Cancer Disease Site Group. Role of Endolaryngeal Surgery (with or without Laser) Compared with Radiotherapy in the Management of Early (T1) Glottic Cancer: A Clinical Practice Guideline. Current Oncology. 2013; 20(2):132-135. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1237

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yoo, J., C. Lacchetti, J.A. Hammond, R.W. Gilbert, and Neck Cancer Disease Site Group. 2013. "Role of Endolaryngeal Surgery (with or without Laser) Compared with Radiotherapy in the Management of Early (T1) Glottic Cancer: A Clinical Practice Guideline" Current Oncology 20, no. 2: 132-135. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1237

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop