Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 37
  • /
  • Pages.19.1-19.7
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The evaluation of a scoring system in airway management after oral cancer surgery

  • Lee, Ho-Jin (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Sahmyook Adventist Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Wook (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Choi, So-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Kim, Chin-Soo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Kwon, Tae-Geon (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Paeng, Jun-Youg (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University)
  • Received : 2015.06.02
  • Accepted : 2015.07.17
  • Published : 2015.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the usefulness of tracheostomy scoring system in the decision of postoperative airway management in oral cancer patients. Materials and methods: A total of 104 patients were reviewed in this retrospective study, who underwent radical resection with or without neck dissection and free flap reconstruction due to oral cancer. The patients were classified into three groups according to the timing of the extubation; extubated groups (n = 51), overnight intubation group (n = 45), and tracheostomy group (n = 8). Cameron's score was used to evaluate the relation between the state of the patient's airway and the type of the operation. Results: Tracheostomy was performed in eight patients (8/104, 7.7 %). A total of 22 patients (21.2 %) had more than 5 points of which 17 patients (77.3 %) did not have a tracheostomy and any postoperative emergency airway problems. The tracheostomy scores were significantly different among the three groups. Hospital stay showed a significant correlation with the tracheostomy score. Conclusions: The scoring system did not quite agree with the airway management of the authors' clinic; however, it can be one of the clinical factors predicting the degree of the postoperative airway obstruction and surgical aggressiveness for recovery. The further studies are needed for clinically more reliable scoring systems.

Keywords

References

  1. Suh JD, Sercarz JA, Abemayor E, Calcaterra TC, Rawnsley JD, Alam D, Blackwell KE (2004) Analysis of outcome and complications in 400 cases of microvascular head and neck reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130:962-966 https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.130.8.962
  2. Buitelaar DR, Balm AJM, Antonini N, van Tinteren H, Huitink JM (2006) Cardiovascular and respiratory complications after major head and neck surgery. Head Neck 28:595-602 https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.20374
  3. Castling B, Telfer M, Avery BS (1994) Complications of tracheostomy in major head and neck cancer surgery; a retrospective study of 60 consecutive cases. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 32:3-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-4356(94)90162-7
  4. Rao MK, Reilley TE, Schuller DE, Young DC (1992) Analysis of risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications in head and neck surgery. Laryngoscope 102:45-47
  5. Semenov YR, Starmer HM, Gourin CG (2012) The effect of pneumonia on short-term outcomes and cost of care after head and neck cancer surgery. Laryngoscope 122:1994-2004 https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23446
  6. Cameron M, Corner A, Diba A, Hankins M (2009) Development of a tracheostomy scoring system to guide airway management after major head and neck surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:846-849 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2009.03.713
  7. Marsh M, Elliott S, Anand R, Brennan PA (2009) Early postoperative care for free flap head & neck reconstructive surgery-a national survey of practice. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 47:182-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2008.06.004
  8. Waldron J, Padgham ND, Hurley SE (1990) Complications of emergency and elective tracheostomy: a retrospective study of 150 consecutive cases. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 72:218-220
  9. Durbin CG (2010) Tracheostomy: why, when, and how? Respir Care 55:1056-1068
  10. Straetmans J, Schlondorff G, Herzhoff G, Windfuhr JP, Kremer B (2010) Complications of midline-open tracheotomy in adults. Laryngoscope 120:84-92 https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.21273
  11. Fattahi T, Vega L, Fernandes R, Goldman N, Steinberg B, Schare H (2012) Our experience with 171 open tracheostomies. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:1699-1702 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2011.07.015
  12. Ong S-K, Morton RP, Kolbe J, Whitlock RML, McIvor NP (2004) Pulmonary complications following major head and neck surgery with tracheostomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130:1084-1087 https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.130.9.1084
  13. Halfpenny W, McGurk M (2000) Analysis of tracheostomy-associated morbidity after operations for head and neck cancer. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:509-512 https://doi.org/10.1054/bjom.2000.0310
  14. Mishra S, Bhatnagar S, Jha RR, Singhal AK (2005) Airway management of patients undergoing oral cancer surgery: a retrospective study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 22:510-514 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021505000876
  15. Godden DR, Patel M, Baldwin A, Woodwards RT (1999) Need for intensive care after operations for head and neck cancer surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37:502-505 https://doi.org/10.1054/bjom.1999.0194
  16. Kruse-Losler B, Langer E, Reich A, Joos U, Kleinheinz J (2005) Score system for elective tracheotomy in major head and neck tumour surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 49:654-659 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2005.00655.x

Cited by

  1. Immediate Use of Uncuffed Tracheostomy after Free Flap Reconstruction of the Head and Neck vol.159, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599818766009
  2. Protocol based evaluation for feasibility of extubation compared to clinical scoring systems after major oral cancer surgery safely reduces the need for tracheostomy: a retrospective cohort study vol.18, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-018-0506-8
  3. Risk factors for acute unplanned tracheostomy during panendoscopy in HNSCC patients vol.13, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207171
  4. The degree of agreement between score-based decision and clinician's discretion regarding the need for tracheotomy in oral cancer surgery : A retrospective analysis vol.100, pp.30, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000026712
  5. Airway Management Strategy Using Seldinger Minitracheostomy Kit to Prevent Airway Obstruction after Oral Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study vol.62, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2209/tdcpublication.2021-0007
  6. Predictive Nomogram for the Necessity of Tracheotomy During Oral and Oropharyngeal Cancer Surgery vol.131, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29121
  7. Tracheostomy in free‐flap reconstruction of the oral cavity: can it be avoided? A cohort study of 187 patients vol.91, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.16762
  8. Evaluation of Scoring Systems for Airway Management After Oral Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study vol.130, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1177/0003489420984353