Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation.
J Voice. 2018 Mar; 32(2):249-255.JV

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess the effect of vocal fold injection augmentation (IA) on subsequent medialization laryngoplasty (ML).

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with follow-up telephone survey was carried out.

METHODS

Clinical records of patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis or paresis (VFP) who underwent ML between April 2006 and March 2015 were reviewed. Patients who underwent IA before ML were compared with patients who did not, with respect to demographic information, symptoms, Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10), etiology of VFP, and revision rate. Among patients undergoing IA, the effects of injection material and of interval from IA to ML on revision rate were assessed. Follow-up telephone surveys were conducted to evaluate long-term outcomes using VHI-10 and a condition-specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-five patients (70 male:65 female) with vocal fold paralysis (125) or paresis (10) underwent ML (96 left:39 right). Sixty-six (48.9%) patients underwent concurrent arytenoid adduction. Fourteen (10.4%) patients required revision. Fifty-six (41.5%) patients had prior IA; five (8.9%) patients underwent revision. Seventy-nine (58.5%) patients did not have IA; nine (11.4%) patients required revision (P = 0.78). Neither augmentation material nor length of interval between last IA and ML affected the revision rate (P = 1.00; P ≥ 0.11 for all tested intervals, respectively). No difference in follow-up VHI-10 score was found between patients who had IA before ML and patients who had not (P = 0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

IA does not appear to affect the revision rate or long-term outcome of subsequent ML.

Links

Publisher Full Text
Aggregator Full Text

Authors+Show Affiliations

Silva Merea V
New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Husain S
Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.
Sulica L
Sean Parker Institute for the Voice, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Electronic address: lus2005@med.cornell.edu.

MeSH

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarboxymethylcellulose SodiumDisability EvaluationDurapatiteFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansInjectionsLaryngoplastyMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesTelephoneTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVocal Cord ParalysisVocal CordsVoice QualityYoung Adult

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

28684252

Citation

Silva Merea, Valeria, et al. "Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation." Journal of Voice : Official Journal of the Voice Foundation, vol. 32, no. 2, 2018, pp. 249-255.
Silva Merea V, Husain S, Sulica L. Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation. J Voice. 2018;32(2):249-255.
Silva Merea, V., Husain, S., & Sulica, L. (2018). Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation. Journal of Voice : Official Journal of the Voice Foundation, 32(2), 249-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2017.05.007
Silva Merea V, Husain S, Sulica L. Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation. J Voice. 2018;32(2):249-255. PubMed PMID: 28684252.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Medialization Laryngoplasty After Injection Augmentation. AU - Silva Merea,Valeria, AU - Husain,Solomon, AU - Sulica,Lucian, Y1 - 2017/07/03/ PY - 2017/02/21/received PY - 2017/05/05/revised PY - 2017/05/10/accepted PY - 2017/7/8/pubmed PY - 2018/9/5/medline PY - 2017/7/8/entrez KW - Injection augmentation KW - Medialization laryngoplasty KW - Outcome KW - Vocal fold paralysis KW - Vocal fold paresis SP - 249 EP - 255 JF - Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation JO - J Voice VL - 32 IS - 2 N2 - OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the effect of vocal fold injection augmentation (IA) on subsequent medialization laryngoplasty (ML). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study with follow-up telephone survey was carried out. METHODS: Clinical records of patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis or paresis (VFP) who underwent ML between April 2006 and March 2015 were reviewed. Patients who underwent IA before ML were compared with patients who did not, with respect to demographic information, symptoms, Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10), etiology of VFP, and revision rate. Among patients undergoing IA, the effects of injection material and of interval from IA to ML on revision rate were assessed. Follow-up telephone surveys were conducted to evaluate long-term outcomes using VHI-10 and a condition-specific questionnaire. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-five patients (70 male:65 female) with vocal fold paralysis (125) or paresis (10) underwent ML (96 left:39 right). Sixty-six (48.9%) patients underwent concurrent arytenoid adduction. Fourteen (10.4%) patients required revision. Fifty-six (41.5%) patients had prior IA; five (8.9%) patients underwent revision. Seventy-nine (58.5%) patients did not have IA; nine (11.4%) patients required revision (P = 0.78). Neither augmentation material nor length of interval between last IA and ML affected the revision rate (P = 1.00; P ≥ 0.11 for all tested intervals, respectively). No difference in follow-up VHI-10 score was found between patients who had IA before ML and patients who had not (P = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: IA does not appear to affect the revision rate or long-term outcome of subsequent ML. SN - 1873-4588 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/28684252/Medialization_Laryngoplasty_After_Injection_Augmentation_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0892-1997(17)30088-7 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -