RESUMO
Background With the COVID-19 pandemic, the clinical practice of physicians who work in the head and neck field in Brazil dropped dramatically. The sustained impact of the pandemic is not known. Methods An anonymous online survey was distributed to Brazilian otolaryngologists, head and neck surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, asking about their clinical practice in the third to fourth months of the pandemic. Results The survey was completed by 446 specialists. About 40% reported reduction of more than 75% in outpatient care. A reduction of 90% to 100% in airway endoscopies was reported by 50% of the responders, and the same rate of reduction regarding surgeries (pediatric or nasosinusal) was reported by 80% of them. Family income decreased by 50%, and the psychological burden on physicians was considerable. The availability of personal protective equipment and safety precautions were limited, especially in the public sector. Conclusion COVID-19 is still impacting the head and neck field, and safety concerns may hinder the prompt resumption of elective care.
RESUMO
Abstract Background With the COVID-19 pandemic, the clinical practice of physicians who work in the head and neck field in Brazil dropped dramatically. The sustained impact of the pandemic is not known. Methods An anonymous online survey was distributed to Brazilian otolaryngologists, head and neck surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, asking about their clinical practice in the third to fourth months of the pandemic. Results The survey was completed by 446 specialists. About 40 % reported reduction of more than 75 % in outpatient care. A reduction of 90 % to 100 % in airway endoscopies was reported by 50 % of the responders, and the same rate of reduction regarding surgeries (pediatric or nasosinusal) was reported by 80 % of them. Family income decreased by 50 %, and the psychological burden on physicians was considerable. The availability of personal protective equipment and safety precautions were limited, especially in the public sector. Conclusion COVID-19 is still impacting the head and neck field, and safety concerns may hinder the prompt resumption of elective care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The primary goal of treatment in advanced laryngeal cancer is to achieve optimal oncologic outcomes while preserving function and quality of life. Combination of chemotherapy and radiation has been popularized as an alternative to surgery for patients facing total laryngectomy. However, survival analyses from large, population-based databases have not duplicated results reported from randomized trials. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was undertaken to try to better understand the reasons why results differ among randomized trials and population cohort studies. RESULTS: A variety of reasons are discussed, including differences in patient staging, selection bias, complexity bias, inconsistent terminology, patient compliance and treatment expertise. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized treatment considering all factors is critical for optimal outcomes. In general, evidence supports total laryngectomy for patients with T4 cancers. Definitive chemoradiotherapy strategies are acceptable alternatives for T3 cancers, provided that all resources for the administration of the treatment, follow-up and surgical salvage are available.