XXXX and comparison of classification staging systems.

@entity1 @entity189 @entity320 @entity3
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe treatment results in @entity1 with @entity320 ( @entity320 ) and to compare three different classification staging systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1988 to 2013, we performed a retrospective study of 20 @entity1 with @entity320 . The median age at diagnosis was 71 years. There were 10 males and 10 females. RESULTS: Nine @entity320 (45%) were originated in the ethmoidal sinus complex, four (20%) in the inferior turbinate, three (15%) in the nasal septum, two (10%) in the maxillary sinus, and two (10%) in the nasal vestibule. Local recurrence was diagnosed in eight @entity1 (40%), and six out of 20 @entity1 (30%) developed distant @entity3 during the course of their disease. The adjusted survival rates at three and five years were 47% and 34%, respectively. The adjusted three-year survival rate according to the sinonasal staging system 7th edition for SMM (TNM-SMM) was 60% in T3 stage, 50% in T4a stage, and 34% in T4b stage (p = 0.05). According to Thompson's staging system, survival was 33% for group one, 58% for group two, and 0% for group three (p = 0.006). With the sinonasal staging system 7th edition for @entity189 (TNM-CAR) survival was 33% in T1, 100% in T2 and T3, 0% in T4a, and 34% in T4b (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience confirms the distribution of @entity1 according to survival rates was better with the TNM-SMM than with Thompson's or the TNM-CAR systems.
