• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Transoral Robotic Surgery Newest Treatment Option for Oropharyngeal Cancers

by Jill U. Adams • April 1, 2014

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

TORS greatly improves immediate recovery time when compared with traditional open surgery, which frequently requires surgeons to perform a mandibulotomy to access the tumor site. Robotic surgery also prevents some serious long-term quality of life issues. “After chemoradiation,” Dr. Richmon said, “there’s scarring and fibrosis, and patients can experience difficulty swallowing for months and years. TORS allows us to remove the cancer through a minimally invasive approach that translates to very favorable functional outcomes.”

You Might Also Like

  • Transoral Robotic Surgery, Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Offer Comparable Survival Estimates for Early T-Stage Oropharyngeal Cancer
  • SM13: Transoral Surgery Valuable Tool in Treatment of Oropharyngeal Cancer
  • Rates of Post-Transoral Robotic Surgery Hemorrhage Are Low
  • What is the Role of Trans-Oral Robotic Surgery (TORS) in HPV Negative Oropharyngeal Cancer?
Explore This Issue
April 2014

Chemoradiation comes with its own slate of side effects, including mucositis, fibrosis, dysphagia, xerostomia, and tissue necrosis.

Two National Cancer Institute (NCI)-sponsored cooperative working groups are planning prospective clinical trials. Dr. Ferris, who serves on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology working group (ECOG), says that comparing surgical and medical treatments of a class of cancers is an opportunity that shouldn’t be missed. In order to permit direct comparisons of treatments, ECOG trial arms will evaluate deintensification or lowering of radiation doses after transoral surgery. In addition, the treatments will be tested in patients with HPV-positive and HPV-negative oropharyngeal tumors. The transoral surgery can be accomplished with either the daVinci robot or laser microsurgery. In addition to functional outcomes, study objectives will include assessments of feasibility, toxicity, and cost.

Interestingly, the oncologic outcomes of different treatment modalities are not well characterized, said Dr. Richmon. If you compare the survival rates of open surgery, TORS, and chemoradiation, he said, “there’s no high-level evidence supporting one treatment over another at this point. But from a functional standpoint, patients treated with TORS do much better.” And with a younger demographic of patients, long-term side effects have more impact because there are more years of life to interfere with.

As for cost, TORS is competitive for now. “The machine costs $2 million, but if a hospital utilizes between departments—including urology, otolaryngology, thoracic surgery, cardiovascular surgery, and gynecology—then you spread that cost out,” said Dr. Moore.

Dr. Moore conducted a cost study comparing transoral surgery and standard of care chemotherapy and radiation and found significant cost savings with the surgery (see “Treatment Cost Comparisons,” above).

Treatment Cost Comparisons

Values represent mean reimbursement costs from two teaching hospitals. Data from Moore EJ, Hinni ML, Olsen KD, Price DL, Laborde RR, Inman JC. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;146:946-951.

How the Robot Works

The robot gives the surgeon both an excellent view and articulated robot arm access to those areas just out of sight. Dr. Moore spent a week training at the robot’s manufacturer and then returned to Mayo and started a protocol. Indeed, 50 of his patients underwent the procedure in an off-label use protocol, and those data were combined with that of patients from the University of Alabama at Birmingham and the University of Pennsylvania to submit to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Head and Neck, Practice Focus, Special Reports Tagged With: cancer, head and neck, TORS, transoral robotic surgeryIssue: April 2014

You Might Also Like:

  • Transoral Robotic Surgery, Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Offer Comparable Survival Estimates for Early T-Stage Oropharyngeal Cancer
  • SM13: Transoral Surgery Valuable Tool in Treatment of Oropharyngeal Cancer
  • Rates of Post-Transoral Robotic Surgery Hemorrhage Are Low
  • What is the Role of Trans-Oral Robotic Surgery (TORS) in HPV Negative Oropharyngeal Cancer?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939