Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study

Objectives There is currently no consensus on the optimal feeding route for an oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) patient without pre‐existing dysphagia undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the swallowing outcomes for OPSCC patients fed via either prophylactic RIG (pRIG)...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical otolaryngology 2017-12, Vol.42 (6), p.1135-1140
Hauptverfasser: Goff, D., Coward, S., Fitzgerald, A., Paleri, V., Moor, J.W., Patterson, J.M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1140
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1135
container_title Clinical otolaryngology
container_volume 42
creator Goff, D.
Coward, S.
Fitzgerald, A.
Paleri, V.
Moor, J.W.
Patterson, J.M.
description Objectives There is currently no consensus on the optimal feeding route for an oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) patient without pre‐existing dysphagia undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the swallowing outcomes for OPSCC patients fed via either prophylactic RIG (pRIG) or reactive nasogastric tube (rNGT). Design A prospective cohort study. Setting Four head and neck cancer centres in the North of England Cancer Network. Participants Fifty‐three participants with OPSCC, on a normal diet pre‐(chemo) radiotherapy. Main outcome measure Swallowing outcomes for patients with rNGT and pRIG were compared using the following outcome measures administered prospectively at pre‐treatment, three and 12 months post‐treatment: MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), Performance Status Scales (Normalcy of Diet), timed water swallow test. Results Twenty‐three patients received pRIG while 30 were planned for a rNGT. No differences in demographics were found between the groups. The rNGT group had a clinically significant higher score on MDADI at 12 months post‐treatment. No significant difference was found on a timed water swallow test or diet texture scale. Conclusions There is no statistical difference for swallowing outcomes in either group. However, patients’ in the rNGT group reported a clinically meaningful difference at 1 year, with a trend for them to do better across all measures. Neither group returned to their baseline swallowing function. Further research with a larger sample size is indicated.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/coa.12836
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1862767769</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1967247331</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3536-6bd23af2f40900215f6910e7d60b26549c5ee8eb9a5bccd9c1395a1c29539d6c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiNERUvhwAsgS1zaw7Z2nNgxt9WqBaRKPQDnaOJMNq6SOLWdrvKuPAxOs_SAVF9szXzzz3j-JPnE6BWL51pbuGJpwcWb5IzJTG2yrBBvX96yOE3ee_9AacapZO-S07SIeFGIs-TPzwN0nT2YYU_sFLTt0ZPGOjJCMDgETw4mtMQ6O7bg5mGP0BH_OEFvJ080dh3R4LQZbA8kOISA9VoyOtPHCnKhW-ztpYPaREk7kNCig3EmDjWap6UxmiUWK2KTuQMdjCZ78MFZH2w_x-4RXsJPSAbw9jkXmTBV-JVsl0I_4prXtrUuEB-mev6QnDTQefx4vM-T37c3v3bfN3f3337stncbzXMuNqKqUw5N2mRUUZqyvBGKUZS1oFUq8kzpHLHASkFeaV0rzbjKgelU5VzVQvPz5GLVjYM8TuhD2Ru_7AYGjGsqWSFSKaQUKqJf_kMf7OSGOF3JlJBpJjlnkbpcKR1_5h025XGbJaPlYnkZLS-fLY_s56PiVPVYv5D_PI7A9QocTIfz60rl7n67Sv4FSXK85w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1967247331</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Goff, D. ; Coward, S. ; Fitzgerald, A. ; Paleri, V. ; Moor, J.W. ; Patterson, J.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Goff, D. ; Coward, S. ; Fitzgerald, A. ; Paleri, V. ; Moor, J.W. ; Patterson, J.M.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives There is currently no consensus on the optimal feeding route for an oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) patient without pre‐existing dysphagia undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the swallowing outcomes for OPSCC patients fed via either prophylactic RIG (pRIG) or reactive nasogastric tube (rNGT). Design A prospective cohort study. Setting Four head and neck cancer centres in the North of England Cancer Network. Participants Fifty‐three participants with OPSCC, on a normal diet pre‐(chemo) radiotherapy. Main outcome measure Swallowing outcomes for patients with rNGT and pRIG were compared using the following outcome measures administered prospectively at pre‐treatment, three and 12 months post‐treatment: MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), Performance Status Scales (Normalcy of Diet), timed water swallow test. Results Twenty‐three patients received pRIG while 30 were planned for a rNGT. No differences in demographics were found between the groups. The rNGT group had a clinically significant higher score on MDADI at 12 months post‐treatment. No significant difference was found on a timed water swallow test or diet texture scale. Conclusions There is no statistical difference for swallowing outcomes in either group. However, patients’ in the rNGT group reported a clinically meaningful difference at 1 year, with a trend for them to do better across all measures. Neither group returned to their baseline swallowing function. Further research with a larger sample size is indicated.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1749-4478</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1749-4486</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/coa.12836</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28128886</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cancer ; Cancer therapies ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - complications ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - pathology ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - therapy ; Chemoradiotherapy ; Cohort analysis ; Cohort Studies ; Deglutition - physiology ; Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis ; Deglutition Disorders - epidemiology ; Deglutition Disorders - prevention &amp; control ; Demographics ; Demography ; Dysphagia ; Female ; Gastrostomy ; Head &amp; neck cancer ; head and neck cancer ; Humans ; Intubation, Gastrointestinal ; Male ; Middle Aged ; nasogastric tube ; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - complications ; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology ; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - therapy ; Ostomy ; Patients ; Radiation ; Radiation therapy ; Squamous cell carcinoma ; Swallowing ; Throat cancer ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Clinical otolaryngology, 2017-12, Vol.42 (6), p.1135-1140</ispartof><rights>2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3536-6bd23af2f40900215f6910e7d60b26549c5ee8eb9a5bccd9c1395a1c29539d6c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3536-6bd23af2f40900215f6910e7d60b26549c5ee8eb9a5bccd9c1395a1c29539d6c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0973-8269 ; 0000-0002-7933-4585 ; 0000-0002-4399-0572</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcoa.12836$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcoa.12836$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,1419,27931,27932,45581,45582</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28128886$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Goff, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coward, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgerald, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paleri, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moor, J.W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patterson, J.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study</title><title>Clinical otolaryngology</title><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><description>Objectives There is currently no consensus on the optimal feeding route for an oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) patient without pre‐existing dysphagia undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the swallowing outcomes for OPSCC patients fed via either prophylactic RIG (pRIG) or reactive nasogastric tube (rNGT). Design A prospective cohort study. Setting Four head and neck cancer centres in the North of England Cancer Network. Participants Fifty‐three participants with OPSCC, on a normal diet pre‐(chemo) radiotherapy. Main outcome measure Swallowing outcomes for patients with rNGT and pRIG were compared using the following outcome measures administered prospectively at pre‐treatment, three and 12 months post‐treatment: MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), Performance Status Scales (Normalcy of Diet), timed water swallow test. Results Twenty‐three patients received pRIG while 30 were planned for a rNGT. No differences in demographics were found between the groups. The rNGT group had a clinically significant higher score on MDADI at 12 months post‐treatment. No significant difference was found on a timed water swallow test or diet texture scale. Conclusions There is no statistical difference for swallowing outcomes in either group. However, patients’ in the rNGT group reported a clinically meaningful difference at 1 year, with a trend for them to do better across all measures. Neither group returned to their baseline swallowing function. Further research with a larger sample size is indicated.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - complications</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - therapy</subject><subject>Chemoradiotherapy</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Deglutition - physiology</subject><subject>Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Deglutition Disorders - epidemiology</subject><subject>Deglutition Disorders - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Demographics</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Dysphagia</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastrostomy</subject><subject>Head &amp; neck cancer</subject><subject>head and neck cancer</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>nasogastric tube</subject><subject>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - complications</subject><subject>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Ostomy</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Radiation</subject><subject>Radiation therapy</subject><subject>Squamous cell carcinoma</subject><subject>Swallowing</subject><subject>Throat cancer</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1749-4478</issn><issn>1749-4486</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiNERUvhwAsgS1zaw7Z2nNgxt9WqBaRKPQDnaOJMNq6SOLWdrvKuPAxOs_SAVF9szXzzz3j-JPnE6BWL51pbuGJpwcWb5IzJTG2yrBBvX96yOE3ee_9AacapZO-S07SIeFGIs-TPzwN0nT2YYU_sFLTt0ZPGOjJCMDgETw4mtMQ6O7bg5mGP0BH_OEFvJ080dh3R4LQZbA8kOISA9VoyOtPHCnKhW-ztpYPaREk7kNCig3EmDjWap6UxmiUWK2KTuQMdjCZ78MFZH2w_x-4RXsJPSAbw9jkXmTBV-JVsl0I_4prXtrUuEB-mev6QnDTQefx4vM-T37c3v3bfN3f3337stncbzXMuNqKqUw5N2mRUUZqyvBGKUZS1oFUq8kzpHLHASkFeaV0rzbjKgelU5VzVQvPz5GLVjYM8TuhD2Ru_7AYGjGsqWSFSKaQUKqJf_kMf7OSGOF3JlJBpJjlnkbpcKR1_5h025XGbJaPlYnkZLS-fLY_s56PiVPVYv5D_PI7A9QocTIfz60rl7n67Sv4FSXK85w</recordid><startdate>201712</startdate><enddate>201712</enddate><creator>Goff, D.</creator><creator>Coward, S.</creator><creator>Fitzgerald, A.</creator><creator>Paleri, V.</creator><creator>Moor, J.W.</creator><creator>Patterson, J.M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0973-8269</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7933-4585</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4399-0572</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201712</creationdate><title>Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study</title><author>Goff, D. ; Coward, S. ; Fitzgerald, A. ; Paleri, V. ; Moor, J.W. ; Patterson, J.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3536-6bd23af2f40900215f6910e7d60b26549c5ee8eb9a5bccd9c1395a1c29539d6c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - complications</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - therapy</topic><topic>Chemoradiotherapy</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Deglutition - physiology</topic><topic>Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Deglutition Disorders - epidemiology</topic><topic>Deglutition Disorders - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Demographics</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Dysphagia</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastrostomy</topic><topic>Head &amp; neck cancer</topic><topic>head and neck cancer</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intubation, Gastrointestinal</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>nasogastric tube</topic><topic>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - complications</topic><topic>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Ostomy</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Radiation</topic><topic>Radiation therapy</topic><topic>Squamous cell carcinoma</topic><topic>Swallowing</topic><topic>Throat cancer</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Goff, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coward, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgerald, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paleri, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moor, J.W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patterson, J.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Goff, D.</au><au>Coward, S.</au><au>Fitzgerald, A.</au><au>Paleri, V.</au><au>Moor, J.W.</au><au>Patterson, J.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study</atitle><jtitle>Clinical otolaryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Otolaryngol</addtitle><date>2017-12</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1135</spage><epage>1140</epage><pages>1135-1140</pages><issn>1749-4478</issn><eissn>1749-4486</eissn><abstract>Objectives There is currently no consensus on the optimal feeding route for an oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) patient without pre‐existing dysphagia undergoing chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the swallowing outcomes for OPSCC patients fed via either prophylactic RIG (pRIG) or reactive nasogastric tube (rNGT). Design A prospective cohort study. Setting Four head and neck cancer centres in the North of England Cancer Network. Participants Fifty‐three participants with OPSCC, on a normal diet pre‐(chemo) radiotherapy. Main outcome measure Swallowing outcomes for patients with rNGT and pRIG were compared using the following outcome measures administered prospectively at pre‐treatment, three and 12 months post‐treatment: MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), Performance Status Scales (Normalcy of Diet), timed water swallow test. Results Twenty‐three patients received pRIG while 30 were planned for a rNGT. No differences in demographics were found between the groups. The rNGT group had a clinically significant higher score on MDADI at 12 months post‐treatment. No significant difference was found on a timed water swallow test or diet texture scale. Conclusions There is no statistical difference for swallowing outcomes in either group. However, patients’ in the rNGT group reported a clinically meaningful difference at 1 year, with a trend for them to do better across all measures. Neither group returned to their baseline swallowing function. Further research with a larger sample size is indicated.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>28128886</pmid><doi>10.1111/coa.12836</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0973-8269</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7933-4585</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4399-0572</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1749-4478
ispartof Clinical otolaryngology, 2017-12, Vol.42 (6), p.1135-1140
issn 1749-4478
1749-4486
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1862767769
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects Aged
Cancer
Cancer therapies
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - complications
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - pathology
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - therapy
Chemoradiotherapy
Cohort analysis
Cohort Studies
Deglutition - physiology
Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis
Deglutition Disorders - epidemiology
Deglutition Disorders - prevention & control
Demographics
Demography
Dysphagia
Female
Gastrostomy
Head & neck cancer
head and neck cancer
Humans
Intubation, Gastrointestinal
Male
Middle Aged
nasogastric tube
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - complications
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - pathology
Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - therapy
Ostomy
Patients
Radiation
Radiation therapy
Squamous cell carcinoma
Swallowing
Throat cancer
Treatment Outcome
title Swallowing outcomes for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treated with primary (chemo)radiation therapy receiving either prophylactic gastrostomy or reactive nasogastric tube: A prospective cohort study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-04T18%3A58%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Swallowing%20outcomes%20for%20patients%20with%20oropharyngeal%20squamous%20cell%20carcinoma%20treated%20with%20primary%20(chemo)radiation%20therapy%20receiving%20either%20prophylactic%20gastrostomy%20or%20reactive%20nasogastric%20tube:%20A%20prospective%20cohort%20study&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20otolaryngology&rft.au=Goff,%20D.&rft.date=2017-12&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1135&rft.epage=1140&rft.pages=1135-1140&rft.issn=1749-4478&rft.eissn=1749-4486&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/coa.12836&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1967247331%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1967247331&rft_id=info:pmid/28128886&rfr_iscdi=true