These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Treatment outcomes of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma according to surgical approach.
    Author: Hyun DW, Ryu JH, Kim YS, Kim KB, Kim WS, Kim CH, Yoon JH.
    Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2011 Jan; 75(1):69-73. PubMed ID: 21030094.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: This is a retrospective study to assess treatment outcomes according to stage and surgical approach in advanced juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma (JNA). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 20 JNA patients diagnosed and treated at our hospital. We only enrolled advanced disease with Radkowski stages greater than I and with minimum follow-up of 1 year (range 1-8.5). RESULTS: Recurrence or remnants were observed in 7 patients out of 20 patients (35.0%) who underwent primary surgical resection of advanced JNA and the mean interval to recurrence was 15.6 months (range 6-38). A recurrence rate according to a different stage was as follows: 33.3% in stage IIa, 33.3% in stage IIb, 50.0% in stage IIc and no recurrence in stage III. An endoscopic approach was chosen in 4 patients among these patients, four were classified as stage IIb tumors, one as a stage IIc tumor, with a recurrence rate of 25.0%, but no recurrence found in stage IIa disease. A midfacial degloving approach was used in 7 patients, with a recurrence rate of 42.9% and maxillary swing approach was taken in 3 patients with complete control. Postoperative complications required interventions occurred in 14.8%, more in the invasive maxillary swing or infratemporal fossa approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Although selecting minimal invasive or invasive approaches is equivocal, we recommend using the endoscopic approach or a midfacial degloving approach for the treatment of JNA extended to the pterygopalatine fossa. For stage III, aggressive surgery is preferable to guaranty a complete resection even if postoperative complications are more frequent. For a stage IIc, we could choose between a minimally invasive approach or a more aggressive one balancing between the possibility of salvage surgery in the future and the occurrence of postoperative healing problems.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]