Rampinelli, Vittorio

Background: Sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma (SNUC) is an extremely rare, high-grade, and aggressive tumor of the sinonasal tract. Due to the rarity of this malignancy, current treatment guidelines are based on small and often/mainly single-center retrospective datasets. In the absence of a universally accepted standard of care for SNUC, treatment approaches vary across countries and institutions, reflecting real-world clinical practice. The primary aim of this study was to describe real-world treatment and outcomes for patients with confirmed SNUC. Methods: This was an international, multi-center, retrospective, observational cohort study that pooled patients into the largest SNUC dataset to date. Fifteen centers were enrolled to contribute data, including seven from Europe, four from the United States, three from the United Kingdom, and one from Canada. In the absence of a universally accepted standard of care for SNUC, treatment approaches varied across countries and institutions, reflecting real-world clinical practice. Patients included were those with histologically confirmed SNUC who were treated between 1997 and 2021. Results: This study yielded 485 patients treated for SNUC. The median age at diagnosis was 55.6 years (IQR: 44.5–67.6), and 63.7% were male. Most cases presented at advanced stages, with 70.8% as T4a or T4b. Overall survival (OS) outcomes were available for 412 patients, with a median follow-up of 26.0 months. The 5- and 10-year OS were 47.2% (95% CI: 40.8–53.3%) and 39.6% (95% CI: 32.5–46.6%), respectively. Advanced age, dichotomized T-stage (T4a/b vs. T1–3), M-stage, and orbital involvement were significant poor prognostic factors on univariable analysis (p’s < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, orbital involvement (HR: 2.73, 95% CI: 1.42–5.27, p = 0.003) and distance metastasis stage (HR: 3.00, 95% CI: 1.25–7.21, p = 0.014) were both independently associated with worse OS. Conclusions: This observational study presents the largest multi-center cohort analysis of SNUC to date, providing new insights into prognostic factors for a rare cancer treated at global centers of excellence. Orbital involvement and the presence of metastases are candidate independent risk factors associated with poorer OS.

Abstract Background Sinonasal malignancies with orbital invasion have dismal prognosis even when treated with orbital exenteration (OE). Sugawara et al. developed a surgical strategy called “extended‐OE (EOE),” showing encouraging outcomes. We hypothesized that a similar resection is achievable under endoscopic guidance through the exenterated orbit (endoscopic‐EOE). Methods The study was conducted in three institutions: University of Vienna; Mayo Clinic; University of Insubria; 48 orbital dissections were performed. A questionnaire was developed to evaluate feasibility and safety of each step, scoring from 1 to 10, (“impossible” to “easy,” and “high risk” to “low risk,” respectively), most likely complication(s) were hypothesized. Results The step‐by‐step technique is thoroughly described. The questionnaire was answered by 25 anterior skull base surgeons from six countries. Mean, median, range, and interquartile range of both feasibility and safety scores are reported. Conclusions Endoscopic‐EOE is a challenging but feasible procedure. Clinical validation is required to assess real‐life outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Several microsurgical transcranial approaches (MTAs) and endoscopic transnasal approaches (EEAs) to the anterior cranial fossa (ACF) have been described. OBJECTIVE: To provide a preclinical, quantitative, anatomic, comparative analysis of surgical approaches to the ACF. METHODS: Five alcohol-fixed specimens underwent high-resolution computed tomography. The following approaches were performed on each specimen: EEAs (transcribriform, transtuberculum, and transplanum), anterior MTAs (transfrontal sinus interhemispheric, frontobasal interhemispheric, and subfrontal with unilateral and bilateral frontal craniotomy), and anterolateral MTAs (supraorbital, minipterional, pterional, and frontotemporal orbitozygomatic approach). An optic neuronavigation system and dedicated software (ApproachViewer, part of GTx-Eyes II—UHN) were used to quantify the working volume of each approach and extrapolate the exposure of different ACF regions. Mixed linear models with random intercepts were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: EEAs offer a large and direct route to the midline region of ACF, whose most anterior structures (ie, crista galli, cribriform plate, and ethmoidal roof) are also well exposed by anterior MTAs, whereas deeper ones (ie, planum sphenoidale and tuberculum sellae) are also well exposed by anterolateral MTAs. The orbital roof region is exposed by both anterolateral and lateral MTAs. The posterolateral region (ie, sphenoid wing and optic canal) is well exposed by anterolateral MTAs. CONCLUSION: Anterior and anterolateral MTAs play a pivotal role in the exposure of most anterior and posterolateral ACF regions, respectively, whereas midline regions are well exposed by EEAs. Furthermore, certain anterolateral approaches may be most useful when involvement of the optic canal and nerves involvement are suspected.