Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2018; 79(02): 151-155
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1605593
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Surgical Treatment of Olfactory Neuroblastoma: Major Complication Rates, Progression Free and Overall Survival

Aileen Wertz
1   Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
,
Todd Hollon
2   Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
,
Lawrence J. Marentette
1   Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
2   Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
3   Section of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
,
Stephen E. Sullivan
2   Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
,
Jonathan B. McHugh
4   Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
,
Erin L. McKean
1   Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
2   Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

31 July 2016

21 June 2017

Publication Date:
17 August 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective We aimed to compare major complication rates in patients undergoing open versus endoscopic resection of olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB) and to determine the prognostic utility of the Kadish staging and Hyams grading systems with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Methods It is a retrospective review of experience in treating ONB at a single tertiary care hospital from 1987 through 2015. Major complications were defined as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, meningitis, osteomyelitis, tracheostomy, and severe neurologic injury.

Results Forty-one patients were included. An open approach was used in 34 (83%), endoscopic in 6 (15%), and combined in 1 (2%) case. Rates of major complications by surgical approach were 17% after endoscopic versus 31% after open (p = 0.65). There was no significant difference in PFS or OS based on Kadish B versus C (PFS, p = 0.28; OS, p = 0.11) or Hyams grade 1 and 2 versus Hyams grade 3 and 4 (PFS, p = 0.53; OS, p = 0.38).

Conclusions There was no significant difference in major complications between open and endoscopic approaches for the treatment of ONB. Patient stratification using the Kadish staging and Hyams grading systems did not show significant differences in PFS or OS. Further research is needed to determine if a different staging system would better predict patient outcomes.

Keywords

olfactory neuroblastoma - endoscopic - complication - recurrence - survival - Kadish - Hyams
 

  • References

  • 1 Bragg TM, Scianna J, Kassam A. , et al. Clinicopathological review: esthesioneuroblastoma. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (04) 764-770 , discussion 770
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Berger L, Luc G, Richard D. The olfactory esthesioneur- oepithelioma. Bull Assoc Fr Etud Cancer 1924; 13: 410-421
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Loy AH, Reibel JF, Read PW. , et al. Esthesioneuroblastoma: continued follow-up of a single institution's experience. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 132 (02) 134-138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Resto VA, Eisele DW, Forastiere A, Zahurak M, Lee DJ, Westra WH. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the Johns Hopkins experience. Head Neck 2000; 22 (06) 550-558
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Dulguerov P, Allal AS, Calcaterra TC. Esthesioneuroblastoma: a meta-analysis and review. Lancet Oncol 2001; 2 (11) 683-690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Simon JH, Zhen W, McCulloch TM. , et al. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the University of Iowa experience 1978-1998. Laryngoscope 2001; 111 (03) 488-493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Argiris A, Dutra J, Tseke P, Haines K. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the Northwestern University experience. Laryngoscope 2003; 113 (01) 155-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chao KS, Kaplan C, Simpson JR. , et al. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the impact of treatment modality. Head Neck 2001; 23 (09) 749-757
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ward PD, Heth JA, Thompson BG, Marentette LJ. Esthesioneuroblastoma: results and outcomes of a single institution's experience. Skull Base 2009; 19 (02) 133-140
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Kadish S, Goodman M, Wang CC. Olfactory neuroblastoma. A clinical analysis of 17 cases. Cancer 1976; 37 (03) 1571-1576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dulguerov P, Calcaterra T. Esthesioneuroblastoma: the UCLA experience 1970-1990. Laryngoscope 1992; 102 (08) 843-849
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hyams V. Olfactory neuroblastoma (case 6). . In: Batsakis J, Hyams V, Morales A. , eds. Special Tumors of the Head and Neck. Chicago, IL: American Society of Clinical Pathologists; 1983: 24-29
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Komotar RJ, Starke RM, Raper DMS, Anand VK, Schwartz TH. Endoscopic endonasal compared with anterior craniofacial and combined cranionasal resection of esthesioneuroblastomas. World Neurosurg 2013; 80 (1-2): 148-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Feng L, Fang J, Zhang L. , et al. Endoscopic endonasal resection of esthesioneuroblastoma: a single center experience of 24 patients. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2015; 138: 94-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Morita A, Ebersold MJ, Olsen KD, Foote RL, Lewis JE, Quast LM. Esthesioneuroblastoma: prognosis and management. Neurosurgery 1993; 32 (05) 706-714 , discussion 714–715
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kane AJ, Sughrue ME, Rutkowski MJ. , et al. Posttreatment prognosis of patients with esthesioneuroblastoma. J Neurosurg 2010; 113 (02) 340-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Constantinidis J, Steinhart H, Koch M. , et al. Olfactory neuroblastoma: the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg experience 1975-2000. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130 (05) 567-574
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Dias FL, Sa GM, Lima RA. , et al. Patterns of failure and outcome in esthesioneuroblastoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003; 129 (11) 1186-1192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Miyamoto RC, Gleich LL, Biddinger PW, Gluckman JL. Esthesioneuroblastoma and sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma: impact of histological grading and clinical staging on survival and prognosis. Laryngoscope 2000; 110 (08) 1262-1265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Polin RS, Sheehan JP, Chenelle AG. , et al. The role of preoperative adjuvant treatment in the management of esthesioneuroblastoma: the University of Virginia experience. Neurosurgery 1998; 42 (05) 1029-1037
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar