Search

The purpose of this study was to compare radiation treatment plans (RTPs) that used intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with helical tomotherapy (HT) or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) for nasal natural killer/Tcell lymphoma (NNKTL). We created RTPs that used IMRT with HT or 3D-CRT for eight NNKTL patients previously treated at our institution and conducted a pilot comparison between the two modalities using the parameters of the target coverage and homogeneity for the planning target volume (PTV) and the maximum and mean doses for organs at risk (OARs). The clinical target volume (CTV) included the gross tumour volume with an additional margin of 1.5 cm and the nasopharynx, palates and nasal cavity; the PTV with the CTV plus a 2 mm margin received a total dose of 50 Gy. IMRT achieved significantly better PTV coverage, with more than 99% of the PTV receiving 90% and 95% of the prescribed dose, whereas 3D-CRT could not provide adequate coverage of the PTV, with 89.1±2.6% and 84.5±2.7% of the PTV receiving 90% and 95% of the prescribed dose, respectively (both p ,0.0001). The homogeneity index was 0.29±0.06 for IMRT and 0.046±0.022 for 3D-CRT, which was statistically significant (p<0.0001). IMRT tended to provide equivalent or slightly better OAR avoidance than 3DCRT. In conclusion, 3D-CRT could not provide adequate coverage of the PTV because the PTV was close to many OARs. IMRT should be used for NNKTL because a lack of optimal RTPs could cause local failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

No study has systematically reviewed the evidence on presentation of oropharyngeal dysphagia and swallowing rehabilitation following esophagectomy. The purposes of this systematic review are to 1) qualitatively synthesize the current findings on oropharyngeal swallowing abnormalities identified by instrumental swallowing evaluations, 2) describe the reported health-related outcomes in relation to swallowing abnormality following esophagectomy, and 3) examine the efficacy of reported rehabilitative interventions for oropharyngeal dysphagia in patients who underwent esophagectomy. Publications were searched using five electronic databases. No language or publication date restrictions were imposed. Two authors performed a blind review for published or unpublished studies that reported swallowing biomechanics and dysphagic symptoms using instrumental evaluation of swallowing, specifically the videofluoroscopic swallowing study and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, and/or health-related outcomes in relation to swallowing abnormalities, and/or therapeutic interventions for oropharyngeal dysphagia following esophagectomy. Twelve studies out of 2,193 studies including 458 patients met the inclusion criteria. Reported abnormal swallowing biomechanics included vocal fold immobility, delayed onset of swallowing, reduced hyolaryngeal elevation, and reduced opening of the upper esophageal sphincter. Aspiration (0–81%) and pharyngeal residue (22–100%) were prevalent. Those abnormal swallowing biomechanics and swallowing symptoms were commonly reported following both transhiatal and transthoracic esophagectomy. Pneumonia presented in 5–25% of the study patients. One quasi-experimental study examined the effectiveness of swallowing exercises for postoperative oropharyngeal dysphagia; three case series reported a benefit of the chin-tuck maneuver in reducing aspiration and residue. This review revealed distinct swallowing impairments and increased pneumonia risks following esophagectomy. This review also found that evidence on the efficacy of therapeutic interventions was limited. Future studies are warranted to develop effective rehabilitative interventions for postesophagectomy patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]