Purpose: This systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the validity and reliability of existing measurement instruments for quantifying head and neck lymphedema. Methods: Four databases were searched on January 31st, 2022. The COnsensus-based Standards for selecting health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklists were used for the risk of bias (ROB) assessment. Results: Out of 3362 unique records, eight studies examined the reliability and validity of five measurement instruments of which one patient reported outcome. The Patterson scale for internal lymphedema and the patient reported head and neck external lymphedema and fibrosis (LIDS-H&N) demonstrated validity and reliability. For external lymphedema, none of the instruments had good reliability for all measuring points. Conclusion: There is a lack of sufficiently reliable and valid measurement instruments for external head and neck lymphedema. The Patterson scale and the patient reported LIDS-H&N seem reliable for clinical practice and research.

Background: To assess the prevalence of chronic lymphedema and trismus in patients > 6 months after head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment, and to explore how the severity of these conditions correlates with body image and quality of life. Methods: The cross-sectional sample included 59 patients, treated for HNC between six months to three years ago. Physical measurements were performed to assess the presence of external lymphedema and trismus (<36 mm). Furthermore, participants completed two questionnaires regarding body image (BIS) and quality of life (UW-QoL V4). Results: Lymphedema prevalence was 94.1% (95% CI 0.86–0.98), with a median severity score of 9 (range 0–24). Trismus prevalence in this sample was 1.2%. The median BIS score was 2, indicating a positive body image. The UW-QoL score showed a good QOL with a median of 100. Only the domain of saliva and overall related health had a lower median of 70 and 60, respectively. There was no correlation between lymphedema and body image (r = 0.08, p = 0.544). Patients with higher lymphedema scores reported poorer speech with a moderate correlation (r = −0.39, p = 0.003). Conclusion: Lymphedema is a highly prevalent, but moderately severe late side-effect of HNC with a limited impact on quality of life domains except for speech, in our cohort.

Background: Lymphedema measurement is vital to select appropriate treatment and monitor its progress. Quantifying lymphedema in the head and neck area is challenging. The use of tissue dielectric constant (TDC) measurements has shown promising results in other body areas. This study aims to determine the test-retest reliability of a TDC measurement protocol developed for the head and neck area. Methods and Results: A detailed measurement protocol, including eight measurement points per side, was developed. Subsequently, the reliability of the protocol was tested in a sample of healthy participants (n = 50, 28 males). Using the LymphScanner (Delfin, Finland), participants were subjected to two measurement sessions. Each measurement point was measured three times per session. Test-retest reliability for each point was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and standard errors of measurement (SEMs). Using the average of three measurements, reliability was good to excellent for all points (ICCs 0.81–0.95), with small measurement errors (SEMs 1.51–2.86). The reliability of a single measurement was moderate to excellent for all measurement points (ICCs 0.58–0.87), with larger, but still small, measurement errors (SEMs 1.65–3.39). When using single measurements, the lowest ICCs were found for the temporal (left 0.73 and right 0.67) and submandibular (left 0.58 and right 0.77) locations. Conclusion: Measurements with the LymphScanner, taken according to the developed protocol, are reliable in healthy participants. We recommend using the average of three measurements to optimize reliability. The protocol is fit for further testing in patient populations and for determining normal values in a larger scale study with healthy subjects.

MRI-based 3D models provide patient-specific spatial information on the relationship between parotid gland tumors and the facial nerve. However, their potential role in clinical practice and the level of support for their implementation remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the level of consensus among surgeons on the current clinical workflows in parotid gland surgery and the future role of 3D models. We used a three-round Delphi study to explore consensus among surgeons performing more than five parotid surgeries annually. Round 1 consisted of semi-structured interviews about parotid surgery, innovations, and the use of 3D models. Inductive analysis was used to formulate statements and questions for round 2. In rounds 2 and 3, participants rated the questions and statements on a 7-point adjective scale. A panel of 15 surgeons, including 9 otolaryngologists and 6 oral and maxillofacial surgeons from nine Dutch hospitals, completed all study rounds. Partial consensus was observed for 10% of statements in round 3. Trends toward greater importance of both MRI scanning and 3D model use were identified in cases involving malignancy, facial nerve dysfunction, deep lobe tumors, fixed tumors, non-palpable tumors, and indications for a mastoidectomy. Stronger trends toward importance were observed for using 3D models in preoperative planning and patient counseling than in their use during surgery. Although consensus was limited, this study identified indications for MRI use and highlighted the perceived value of 3D models in parotid gland tumor surgery.