Endoscopic vs Transfacial Resection of Sinonasal Adenocarcinomas

Objectives. Compare the survival and the complication rates of 2 comparable groups of patients who underwent either endoscopic or transfacial resection of a sinonasal adenocarcinoma. Study Design. Historical cohort study. Setting. Tertiary referral center. Subjects and Methods. Twenty-four patients with sinonasal adenocarcinomas who recently underwent an endoscopy (the ENDO group, 1999-2009) were compared with 24 patients who underwent a lateral rhinotomy procedure (the LR group, 1993-2007). The present retrospective study included patients who would have had an endoscopic resection in 2011. Results. The groups were comparable in terms of age and sex (P = .49), as well as tumor stages; 43 of the 48 patients had undergone postoperative radiotherapy. There were 13 T1-T2 and 11 T3-T4 tumors in the ENDO group compared with 12 T1-T2 and 12 T3-T4 tumors in the LR group (P = .77). The mean length of follow-up was 38 months for the ENDO group and 89 for the LR group. The overall survival and recurrence-free rates were not significantly different (P = .3 and P = .87, respectively). The median duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the ENDO group than in the LR group (4 vs 8 days, P < .0001). The rate of early complications was identical in both groups (12.5%). Conclusion. The endoscopic approach is a safe and effective treatment in selected sinonasal adenocarcinoma cases. The early oncological outcome and morbidity associated with the endoscopic approach were comparable with a transfacial approach. Hospitalization was significantly reduced by the endoscopic approach. Although the endoscopic approach is less invasive, it requires an optimal preoperative imaging protocol and an experienced surgical team.