To study preoperative counseling in patients undergoing salvage total laryngectomy (STL).
Study Design
Case series with chart review.
Setting
Tertiary care academic hospital.
Subjects and Methods
We reviewed charts of patients ≥18 years undergoing STL between 2005 and 2015. Fifty-eight patients were identified. Notes written within 2 months prior to surgery by head and neck surgical oncologists, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, speech-language pathologists, social workers, and nurse practitioners were extracted and coded into 4 categories. Coded content was then analyzed using a simple tally within content areas.
Results
Nonphysicians documented patient values and priorities, exclusive of treatment desires, more frequently. These topics included apprehension about family obligations, fear about communication, questions regarding quality of life, and anxiety regarding job continuation. Physician notes documented priorities regarding preferences for surgical treatment. No patients were seen by palliative care preoperatively, and only 14% (n = 8) patients had documentation of an end-of-life discussion.
Conclusions
Preoperative counseling for STL patients that included nonphysicians had a higher frequency of discussion of patients’ priorities. This suggests including these types of providers may lead to more patient-centered care. A prospective study evaluating patient and physician perceptions of preoperative counseling can better identify where discrepancies exists and help conceptualize a framework for preoperative counseling in STL patients and other patients undergoing high-risk surgery.
ForastiereAAZhangQWeberRSet al. Long-term results of RTOG 91-11: a comparison of three nonsurgical treatment strategies to preserve the larynx in patients with locally advanced larynx cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:845-852.
2.
LefebvreJLChevalierDLuboinskiBKirkpatrickAColletteLSahmoudT. Larynx preservation in pyriform sinus cancer: preliminary results of a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trial. EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88:890-899.
3.
Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. The Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1685-1690.
4.
JohansenLVGrauCOvergaardJ. Glottic carcinoma—patterns of failure and salvage treatment after curative radiotherapy in 861 consecutive patients. Radiother Oncol. 2002;63:257-267.
5.
GoodwinWJ. Salvage surgery for patients with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract: when do the ends justify the means?Laryngoscope. 2000;110(3 pt 2suppl 93):1-18.
6.
SandulacheVCVandelaarLJSkinnerHDet al. Salvage total laryngectomy after external-beam radiotherapy: a 20-year experience. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E1962-E1968.
7.
ZafereoM. Surgical salvage of recurrent cancer of the head and neck. Curr Oncol Rep. 2014;16:386.
8.
WulffNBAndersenEKristensenCASørensenCHCharabiBHomøeP. Prognostic factors for survival after salvage total laryngectomy following radiotherapy or chemoradiation failure: a 10-year retrospective longitudinal study in Eastern Denmark. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42:336-346.
9.
RodrigoJPKowalskiLPSilverCEet al. When is reoperative surgery not indicated for recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma?Eur Arch Oto Rhino Laryngol. 2015;272:259-262.
10.
YılmazMYenerMYolluUet al. Depression, self-esteem and sexual function in laryngeal cancer patients. Clin Otolaryngol. 2015;40:349-354.
11.
PerryACaseyECottonS. Quality of life after total laryngectomy: functioning, psychological well-being and self-efficacy. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2015;50:467-475.
12.
DankerHWollbrückDSingerSFuchsMBrählerEMeyerA. Social withdrawal after laryngectomy. Eur Arch Oto Rhino Laryngol. 2010;267:593-600.
13.
RiekeKBoilesenELydiattWSchmidKKHoufekJWatanabe-GallowayS. Population-based retrospective study to investigate preexisting and new depression diagnosis among head and neck cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016;43:42-48.
14.
Batıoğlu-KaraaltınABinbayZYiğitÖDönmezZ. Evaluation of life quality, self-confidence and sexual functions in patients with total and partial laryngectomy. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2017;44:188-194.
15.
De Snoo-TrimpJCBromLPasmanHRWOnwuteaka-PhilipsenBDWiddershovenGAM. Perspectives of medical specialists on sharing decisions in cancer care: a qualitative study concerning chemotherapy decisions with patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Oncologist. 2015;20:1182-1188.
16.
KruserJMPecanacKEBraselKJet al. “And I think that we can fix it”: mental models used in high-risk surgical decision making. Ann Surg. 2015;261:678-684.
17.
PecanacKEKehlerJMBraselKJet al. It’s big surgery: preoperative expressions of risk, responsibility, and commitment to treatment after high-risk operations. Ann Surg. 2014;259:458-463.
18.
MinerTJCohenJCharpentierKMcPhillipsJMarvellLCioffiWG. The palliative triangle: improved patient selection and outcomes associated with palliative operations. Arch Surg. 2011;146:517-522.
19.
FitzgeraldEPerryA. Pre-operative counselling for laryngectomy patients: a systematic review. J Laryngol Otol. 2016;130:15-20.
20.
LilleyEJBaderAMCooperZ. A values-based conceptual framework for surgical appropriateness: an illustrative case report. Ann Palliat Med. 2015;4:54-57.
21.
van der DonkJLevendagPCKuijpersAJet al. Patient participation in clinical decision-making for treatment of T3 laryngeal cancer: a comparison of state and process utilities. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:2369-2378.
22.
HamiltonDWBinsJEMcMeekinPet al. Quality compared to quantity of life in laryngeal cancer: A time trade-off study. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E631-E637.
23.
McNeilBJWeichselbaumRPaukerSG. Speech and survival: tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1981;305:982-987.
24.
LaccourreyeOMalinvaudDMénardMConsoliSGiraudPBonfilsP. Total laryngectomy or laryngeal preservation for advanced laryngeal cancer. Impact of the functional risk upon the patient’s preferences. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2014;131:93-97.
25.
BlanchardPVolkRJRingashJPetersonSKHutchesonKAFrankSJ. Assessing head and neck cancer patient preferences and expectations: a systematic review. Oral Oncol. 2016;62:44-53.
26.
ShumanAGLarkinKThomasDet al. Patient reflections on decision making for laryngeal cancer treatment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(2):299-304.
27.
HoASKrausDHGanlyILeeNYShahJPMorrisLGT. Decision making in the management of recurrent head and neck cancer. Head Neck. 2014;36:144-151.
28.
RedmannAJBraselKJAlexanderCGSchwarzeML. Use of advance directives for high-risk operations: a national survey of surgeons. Ann Surg. 2012;255:418-423.
29.
BradleyCTBraselKJSchwarzeML. Physician attitudes regarding advance directives for high-risk surgical patients: a qualitative analysis. Surgery. 2010;148:209-216.
30.
SchwarzeMLBradleyCTBraselKJ. Surgical “buy-in”: the contractual relationship between surgeons and patients that influences decisions regarding life-supporting therapy. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:843-848.
31.
SchwarzeMLRedmannAJAlexanderGCBraselKJ. Surgeons expect patients to buy-in to postoperative life support preoperatively: results of a national survey. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:1-8.
32.
SteffensNMTucholkaJLNaboznyMJSchmickAEBraselKJSchwarzeML. Engaging patients, health care professionals, and community members to improve preoperative decision making for older adults facing high-risk surgery. JAMA Surg. 2016;151:938-945.
33.
MehannaHKongAAhmedSK. Recurrent head and neck cancer: United Kingdom National Multidisciplinary Guidelines. J Laryngol Otol. 2016;130(S2):S181-S190.
34.
Task Force on Surgical Palliative Care, Committee on Ethics. Statement of principles of palliative care. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2005;90:34-35.
