Background: Quality of life (QoL) is a critical indicator in assessing the success of oncological treatments for head and neck malignancies, reflecting their impact on physiological functions and psychosocial well-being beyond mere survival. Treatments (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy) pose multiple functional and emotional challenges, and recent advancements underscore the necessity of evaluating post-treatment QoL. Objective: This literature review investigates the impact of oncological treatment on the QoL of patients with malignant head and neck cancers (oral, oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, laryngeal) and identifies factors influencing their QoL index. Methodology: Using a PICO framework, studies from PubMed Central were analyzed, selected based on inclusion (English publications, full text, PROM results) and exclusion criteria. The last research was conducted on 6 April 2025. From 231 identified studies, 49 were included after applying filters (MeSH: “Quality of Life,” “laryngeal cancer,” “oral cavity cancer,” etc.). Data were organized in Excel, and the methodology adhered to PRISMA standards. Results: Treatment Impact: Oncological treatments significantly affect QoL, with acute post-treatment declines in functions such as speech, swallowing, and emotional well-being (anxiety, depression). Partial recovery depends on rehabilitative interventions. Influencing Factors: Treatment type, disease stage, socioeconomic, and demographic contexts influence QoL. De-escalated treatments and prompt rehabilitation improve recovery, while complications like trismus, dysphagia, or persistent hearing issues reduce long-term QoL. Assessment Tools: Standardized PROM questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-H&N35, MDADI, HADS) highlighted QoL variations. Studies from Europe, North America, and Asia indicate regional differences in outcomes. Limitations: Retrospective designs, small sample sizes, and PROM variability limit generalizability. Multicentric studies with extended follow-up are recommended. Conclusions: Oncological treatments for head and neck malignancies have a complex impact on QoL, necessitating personalized and multidisciplinary strategies. De-escalated therapies, early rehabilitation, and continuous monitoring are essential for optimizing functional and psychosocial outcomes. Methodological gaps highlight the need for standardized research.

Laryngeal cancer is an important oncological entity in which prognosis depends on the establishment of appropriate preventive and diagnostic measures, especially in high-risk populations. We present a retrospective two-year study (January 2021 to December 2022) with 152 patients diagnosed with laryngeal cancer from a tertiary hospital in Romania. The average age of the patients was 62 years old for both sexes, with a range from 44 to 83 years. The most frequent symptom was dysphonia with or without dyspnea in 142 cases (93.42%), followed by dyspnea alone in nine patients (5.92%) and dysphagia in one case (0.66%). Surgical treatment in this study consisted of partial laryngectomy (CO₂ laser transoral tumor ablation, supraglottic horizontal laryngectomy or hemilaryngectomy), or total laryngectomy. The main treatment was total laryngectomy (63%). For the eight patients with initial organ preservation treatment, the average time of recurrence was about two-and-a-half years. For the four patients who underwent a total circular pharyngo-laryngectomy, the upper digestive tract needed to be rebuilt with a salivary bypass tube or with a tubed myocutaneous flap from the major pectoralis muscle. One strong point is characteristic of the study group in gathering patients with advanced stages of laryngeal carcinoma candidates for salvage surgery and extended reconstruction methods. The development of new prevention protocols is mandatory in Eastern European countries.

Introduction: Oropharyngeal cancer requires a comprehensive evaluation of treatment options, including surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. It is crucial to customize these treatments based on the stage of the tumor and the overall health of the patient, enabling personalized or combined approaches. Transoral surgical techniques have regained popularity due to the advancements and limitations of non-surgical strategies. The potential influence of surgical procedures on patients’ quality of life highlights the need for careful intervention selection; among them, the transoral approach has proven to be especially beneficial for early-stage oropharyngeal neoplasms. Methods: To explore potential treatments for early-stage oropharyngeal malignancies, this study carefully reviews the literature, using information from papers, current research, and global databases. The review protocol commenced on November 2023. A comprehensive search of the PUBMED database was undertaken, employing pertinent terms associated with oropharyngeal, transoral surgery or radiotherapy, robotic surgery, and chemotherapy. Results: Treating early-stage oropharyngeal neoplasms is particularly intriguing due to the multitude of variables influencing treatment decisions, leading to ongoing debates in specialized literature. Regardless of the chosen approach, maintaining a high quality of life is crucial. To assess this, standardized questionnaires from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer were employed, revealing superior outcomes for patients solely undergoing surgical intervention. Additionally, in the realm of specialized literature, cases of HPV-positive oropharyngeal neoplasms are recognized for their heightened radiosensitivity and more favorable long-term prognosis. Conclusions: Surgical intervention and radiotherapy are the main treatment options for oropharyngeal cancer, and they can be used separately or together for maximum effectiveness. Amid ongoing discussions, determining the superior effectiveness between the two options continues to be a matter of debate. This study provides a comprehensive analysis, offering valuable perspectives for future discussions. Neoplasm in the oropharynx can be effectively treated using transoral microsurgery.

Background/Objectives: Head and neck cancers significantly affect patients’ functional and psychosocial well-being. Multidisciplinary tumor boards have a central role in optimizing treatment strategies, but the relationship between tumor characteristics, comorbidities, and quality of life (QoL) remains insufficiently explored. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 94 patients with head and neck cancers evaluated by the oncology committee of Coltea Clinical Hospital in 2024. QoL was assessed post-surgery using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and H&N35 questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, correlations, and multivariate regression analyses were performed to examine associations between clinical variables and QoL outcomes. Results: The cohort comprised 82 men (87.2%) and 12 women (12.8%), with a mean age of 61.5 ± 9.8 years. The most common tumor site was the larynx (43.6%). Global QoL was low (mean = 42.3, SD = 11.7), and fatigue scores were high (mean = 61.5, SD = 13.5). All EORTC domains showed non-normal distributions (Shapiro–Wilk, p < 0.05). Kruskal–Wallis analysis revealed significantly lower QoL scores in patients with metastatic adenopathy with aunknown primary (p = 0.03). Spearman’s correlation indicated a moderate negative association between Charlson Comorbidity Index and QoL (r = −0.38, p = 0.01). Multivariate regression confirmed comorbidities (β = −2.5, p = 0.02) and tumor type (metastatic adenopathy, β = −8.0, p = 0.04) as independent predictors of reduced QoL. Conclusions: Patients with advanced disease and higher comorbidity burden experience significantly poorer QoL after head and neck cancer surgery. Tumor board decisions facilitate individualized treatment planning; however, systematic integration of QoL metrics is essential to optimize both oncological and functional outcomes.