drunken-oracle t1_iz0d7q7 wrote
Reply to comment by insaneinsanity in New type of surgical robot used to remove throat tumour by diacewrb
How so?
insaneinsanity t1_iz0ju0h wrote
Short version: The throat surgeons who use this technology rarely remove the whole tumor. Then the patient needs radiation and/or chemotherapy to fix the residual. This happens in nearly 80% of those patients who undergo the robot surgery.
So, 3 treatments instead of 1 or 2.
drunken-oracle t1_iz0kwmt wrote
I’ve read that doctors can actually remove more of the tumor using robotic surgery.
insaneinsanity t1_iz0pzr2 wrote
That is incorrect.
drunken-oracle t1_iz0qafa wrote
With all due respect, that is the opinion of actual surgeons. I tend to trust them in matters regarding surgery.
insaneinsanity t1_iz0ria7 wrote
/shrugs/ Surgeons generally will say whatever the hell they want.
The only thing that actually matters is the pathology report.
And the pathology reports for patients treated with robotic trans-oral resections of throat tumors leave residual tumors a large proportion of the time.
drunken-oracle t1_iz0rn0q wrote
To be fair, so will people on the Internet.
insaneinsanity t1_iz0sea2 wrote
drunken-oracle t1_iz0uo6a wrote
I read them but didn’t find anything about it.
ohaikthxbai t1_izab8uc wrote
You're right because the articles don't support his claim see my post next to yours
insaneinsanity t1_iz0wb9l wrote
You read the actual papers?
drunken-oracle t1_iz0wl26 wrote
I read the abstracts you linked.
insaneinsanity t1_iz0zy29 wrote
Yeah. That's why I said the papers. This is a complicated area of oncology and requires some in-depth knowledge.
[deleted] t1_iz127p7 wrote
[deleted]
ohaikthxbai t1_izab64w wrote
The OP's article seems to be talking about esophageal cancer not HPV related oropharynx.
ECOG 3311 demonstrates the value of robotic surgery in the deintensification of adjuvant therapy. Doesn't support your argument at all.
ORATOR 2 is a highly problematic trial - their two surgical arm mortalities were far more suggestive of issues with post-op care (in-hospital trach bleed) and surgical/radiation technique (spine infection AFTER radiation).
The surgeons in the ORATOR 2 trial had a morbidity profile that does not reflect any case series, trial, or database study based in the US. They were routinely doing tracheostomies, and they were not credentialing surgeons the way they did in E3311.
Personally the only useful information from the ORATOR 2 trial is: Don't get surgery with any of the surgeons who participated in the ORATOR 2 trial.
ohaikthxbai t1_izabgn1 wrote
What do you define as a "large proportion" and can you post a study that supports this claim.
/shrugs/ seems like you have no idea what you're talking about.
ohaikthxbai t1_izabnal wrote
This is 100% a false claim, read further down in this comment thread this clown has no understanding of the evidence in this field.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments