A new landmark for lingual artery identification during transoral surgery: Anatomic-radiologic study.
base of tongue
bleeding
landmark
lingual artery
transoral robotic surgery
Journal
Head & neck
ISSN: 1097-0347
Titre abrégé: Head Neck
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8902541
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
revised:
02
12
2020
received:
20
06
2020
accepted:
30
12
2020
pubmed:
27
1
2021
medline:
1
7
2021
entrez:
26
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A landmark for the identification of the lingual artery (LA) through a transoral perspective can provide surgeons with an easy method to prevent and manage intraoperative bleeding during transoral approach to the base of tongue (BOT). Thirteen tongue and five head and neck specimens were dissected to identify and assess the reliability of the lingual point (LP) as a new landmark for the LA at BOT. The pathway of 42 LAs was radiologically evaluated; axial depth and vertical offset were measured for each LA. Dissection study: a description of LP is provided; the LA was easily identified in all specimens (36/36 sides) using LP as a landmark. Radiologic study: the mean depth of the LA was 4.2 mm, the mean vertical offset was 1.3 mm. LP is a simple and reliable landmark for identification of the LA, potentially helping surgeons to prevent and manage intraoperative bleeding.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
A landmark for the identification of the lingual artery (LA) through a transoral perspective can provide surgeons with an easy method to prevent and manage intraoperative bleeding during transoral approach to the base of tongue (BOT).
METHODS
Thirteen tongue and five head and neck specimens were dissected to identify and assess the reliability of the lingual point (LP) as a new landmark for the LA at BOT. The pathway of 42 LAs was radiologically evaluated; axial depth and vertical offset were measured for each LA.
RESULTS
Dissection study: a description of LP is provided; the LA was easily identified in all specimens (36/36 sides) using LP as a landmark. Radiologic study: the mean depth of the LA was 4.2 mm, the mean vertical offset was 1.3 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
LP is a simple and reliable landmark for identification of the LA, potentially helping surgeons to prevent and manage intraoperative bleeding.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1487-1498Informations de copyright
© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Holsinger FC, Ferris RL. Transoral endoscopic head and neck surgery and its role within the multidisciplinary treatment paradigm of oropharynx cancer: robotics, lasers, and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(29):3285-3292.
Meccariello G, Cammaroto G, Montevecchi F, et al. Transoral robotic surgery for the management of obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274(2):647-653.
Gun R, Durmus K, Kucur C, Carrau RL, Ozer E. Transoral surgical anatomy and clinical considerations of lateral oropharyngeal wall, parapharyngeal space, and tongue base. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(3):480-485.
Albergotti WG, Gooding WE, Kubik MW, et al. Assessment of surgical learning curves in transoral robotic surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143(6):542-548.
Kassite I, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Lardy H, Binet A. A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(2):353-365.
White HN, Frederick J, Zimmerman T, Carroll WR, Magnuson JS. Learning curve for transoral robotic surgery: a 4-year analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;139(6):564-567.
Hay A, Migliacci J, Karassawa Zanoni D, et al. Haemorrhage following transoral robotic surgery. Clin Otolaryngol. 2018;43(2):638-644.
Mandal R, Duvvuri U, Ferris RL, Kaffenberger TM, Choby GW, Kim S. Analysis of post-transoral robotic-assisted surgery hemorrhage: frequency, outcomes, and prevention. Head Neck. 2016;38(Suppl 1):E776-E782.
Moore EJ, Van Abel KM, Price DL, et al. Transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal carcinoma: surgical margins and oncologic outcomes. Head Neck. 2018;40(4):747-755.
Mirapeix RM, Tobed Secall M, Pollán Guisasola C, et al. Anatomic landmarks in transoral oropharyngeal surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30(2):e101-e106.
Seki S, Sumida K, Yamashita K, Baba O, Kitamura S. Gross anatomical classification of the courses of the human lingual artery. Surg Radiol Anat SRA. 2017;39(2):195-203.
Wu D, Qin J, Guo X, Li S. Analysis of the difference in the course of the lingual arteries caused by tongue position change. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(3):762-766.
Zappa F, Mattavelli D, Madoglio A, et al. Hybrid robotics for endoscopic skull base surgery: preclinical evaluation and surgeon first impression. World Neurosurg. 2020;134:e572-e580.
Lörincz BB, Möckelmann N, Busch C-J, Knecht R. Functional outcomes, feasibility, and safety of resection of transoral robotic surgery: single-institution series of 35 consecutive cases of transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2015;37(11):1618-1624.
Ling DC, Chapman BV, Kim J, et al. Oncologic outcomes and patient-reported quality of life in patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive transoral robotic surgery versus definitive chemoradiation. Oral Oncol. 2016;61:41-46.
Meccariello G, Montevecchi F, Deganello A, et al. The temporalis muscle flap for reconstruction of soft palate and lateral oropharyngeal wall after transoral robotic surgery. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2018;45(1):162-164.
Villanueva NL, de Almeida JR, Sikora AG, Miles BA, Genden EM. Transoral robotic surgery for the management of oropharyngeal minor salivary gland tumors. Head Neck. 2014;36(1):28-33.
Schoppy DW, Kupferman ME, Hessel AC, et al. Transoral endoscopic head and neck surgery (eHNS) for minor salivary gland tumors of the oropharynx. Cancers Head Neck. 2017;2:5.
Chia SH, Gross ND, Richmon JD. Surgeon experience and complications with Transoral robotic surgery (TORS). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;149(6):885-892.
Nichols AC, Theurer J, Prisman E, et al. Radiotherapy versus transoral robotic surgery and neck dissection for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (ORATOR): an open-label, phase 2, randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(10):1349-1359.
Kubik M, Mandal R, Albergotti W, Duvvuri U, Ferris RL, Kim S. Effect of transcervical arterial ligation on the severity of postoperative hemorrhage after transoral robotic surgery. Head Neck. 2017;39(8):1510-1515.
Vergez S, Lallemant B, Ceruse P, et al. Initial multi-institutional experience with transoral robotic surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;147(3):475-481.
Vicini C, Montevecchi F, Campanini A, et al. Clinical outcomes and complications associated with TORS for OSAHS: a benchmark for evaluating an emerging surgical technology in a targeted application for benign disease. J Oto-Rhino-Laryngol. 2014;76(2):63-69.
Pollei TR, Hinni ML, Moore EJ, et al. Analysis of postoperative bleeding and risk factors in transoral surgery of the oropharynx. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;139(11):1212-1218.
Cohen DS, Low GMI, Melkane AE, et al. Establishing a danger zone: an anatomic study of the lingual artery in base of tongue surgery. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(1):110-115.