Functional and oncological outcomes of salvage transoral robotic surgery: a comparative study

Purpose Transoral robotic surgery (TORS) as a first-line therapy has been well-documented but evidence is missing regarding salvage therapy. The aim of this study is to compare the oncological and functional outcomes of TORS as a primary and salvage therapy. Methods This retrospective monocentric study included 74 patients operated by a single surgeon and sorted out into two groups: primary treatment (PT) or Salvage treatment (ST) in case of previous history of radiation therapy. Patients were further stratified by tumour location: larynx and pharynx (lST vs lPT and pST vs pPT). Results Forty-eight patients were included in PT group (64.9%) and 26 in ST group (35.1%). ST patients had more frequent cTis/T1 tumours (57.7% vs 29.2%, p = 0.0164) and no clinical lymph disease (3.8% vs 37.5%, p = 0.0016). Tracheostomy was more often performed in the ST group (57.7% vs 16.7%, p = 0.0003) and the lST subgroup (88.9% vs 9.1%, p < 0.0001). Gastric feeding tube placement was more frequent in the ST group (76.9% vs 33.3%, p = 0.0003), the pST subgroup (64.7% vs 15.4%, p = 0.0009) and the lST subgroup (100% vs 54.5%, p = 0.0297). We observed a trend for more postoperative complications in the ST group (69.2% vs 47.9%, p = 0.0783). The overall survival was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0004), and in the pST subgroup (p < 0.0001). The disease-free survival rate was lower in the ST group (p = 0.0001), the pST subgroup (p = 0.0002) and the lST subgroup (p = 0.0328). Conclusion This study confirms that survival and functional outcomes after salvage TORS are worse than in first line surgery.

Automated summary

This study confirms that survival and functional outcomes after salvage TORS are worse than in first line surgery.