Endoscopic nasal versus open approach for the management of sinonasal adenocarcinoma: A pooled-analysis of 1826 patients.

Abstract

Surgical resection represents the gold standard for the treatment of sinonasal malignancies. This study reviewed the published outcomes on endoscopic surgery or endoscopic-assisted surgery versus open approach for the management of sinonasal adenocarcinomas. PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and CENTRAL electronic databases were searched for English language articles on endoscopic surgery, endoscopic-assisted surgery, and open approach for sinonasal adenocarcinomas. Each article was examined for patient data and outcomes for analysis. Thirty-nine articles including 1826 patients were used for the analysis. The endoscopic surgery and endoscopic-assisted surgery showed low rates of major complications (6.6% and 25.9%, respectively) compared to open approaches (36.4%; p < .01). The incidence of local failure was lower in the endoscopic surgery group as compared with open approach patients (17.8% vs 38.5%; p < .01, respectively). The multivariate Cox regression model showed a worst overall survival related to advanced T classification and open approach. From the existing body of data, there is growing evidence that endoscopic nasal resection is a safe surgical option in the management of sinonasal adenocarcinomas. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Head Neck 38: E2267-E2274, 2016.