OBJECTIVES: This study sought to conduct a systematic published data review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing RM with IO follow-up.
METHODS: Electronic databases and reference lists were searched for RCTs reporting clinical outcomes in ICD patients who did or did not undergo RM. Data were extracted from 9 RCTs, including 6,469 patients, 3,496 of whom were randomized to RM and 2,973 to IO follow-up.
RESULTS: In the RCT setting, RM demonstrated clinical outcomes comparable with office follow-up in terms of all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.83; p = 0.285), cardiovascular mortality (OR: 0.66; p = 0.103), and hospitalization (OR: 0.83; p = 0.196). However, a reduction in all-cause mortality was noted in the 3 trials using home monitoring (OR: 0.65; p = 0.021) with daily verification of transmission. Although the odds of receiving any ICD shock were similar in RM and IO patients (OR: 1.05; p = 0.86), the odds of inappropriate shock were reduced in RM patients (OR: 0.55; p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates that RM and IO follow-up showed comparable overall outcomes related to patient safety and survival, with a potential survival benefit in RCTs using daily transmission verification. RM benefits include more rapid clinical event detection and a reduction in inappropriate shocks.
METHODS: A 56-year-old female presented with a 3-month history of blood-stained nasal discharge. She had been treated with radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma 25 years earlier. Flexible nasal endoscopy demonstrated an exposed bone with an edematous posterior nasopharyngeal mass. Computed tomography showed a pre-vertebral mass with destruction of C1 and C2. She underwent occipito-cervical fusion followed by a combined transnasal and transoral endoscopic debridement of non-viable bone in the same perioperative setting. Healing of the raw mucosa was by secondary intention and reconstruction was not performed.
RESULTS: Histopathological examination reported ulcerated inflamed granulation tissue with no evidence of malignancy. During follow-up, she remained neurologically intact with no recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Using both nasal and oral spaces allows placement of the endoscope in the nasal cavity and surgical instruments in the oral cavity without splitting the palate. Hence, the endoscopic transnasal and transoral approach has vast potential to be effective in carefully selected cases of cervical ORN.