Jian Sun1, Yanqiu Weng, Jun Li, Guoming Wang, Zhiyuan Zhang. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 9th Affiliated Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. jianjian60@yahoo.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine which of the following factors-type of reconstruction, size of tumor, and site of excision-may influence speech intelligibility after glossectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The speech intelligibilities of 27 tongue cancer patients who underwent glossectomy within the range of the hemitongue were investigated within 6 months after operation with a speech intelligibility test formed by 100 sensitive Chinese sounds. They were compared according to the following factors: type of reconstruction (forearm flap or adjacent flap); size of tumor (T1, T2, T3); and site of excision (anterior, middle, posterior, or hemi part). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in speech intelligibility between the forearm flap reconstructed group and adjacent flap reconstructed group (P > .05). There was a significant difference in the result between the T1 and T3 groups (P < .05). The speech intelligibilities of the patients with tumors in anterior tongue or hemitongue were significantly lower than those with tumor in the middle or posterior tongue (P < .05). Patients with preservation of the tip of the tongue or floor of the mouth had higher intelligibilities (P < .05). CONCLUSION: For the patients after glossectomy within the range of hemitongue, except for the type of reconstruction, the tumor site or excision extent of the tongue followed by the tumor size may be key factors in determining the postoperative articulation intelligibility.
PURPOSE: To determine which of the following factors-type of reconstruction, size of tumor, and site of excision-may influence speech intelligibility after glossectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The speech intelligibilities of 27 tongue cancerpatients who underwent glossectomy within the range of the hemitongue were investigated within 6 months after operation with a speech intelligibility test formed by 100 sensitive Chinese sounds. They were compared according to the following factors: type of reconstruction (forearm flap or adjacent flap); size of tumor (T1, T2, T3); and site of excision (anterior, middle, posterior, or hemi part). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in speech intelligibility between the forearm flap reconstructed group and adjacent flap reconstructed group (P > .05). There was a significant difference in the result between the T1 and T3 groups (P < .05). The speech intelligibilities of the patients with tumors in anterior tongue or hemitongue were significantly lower than those with tumor in the middle or posterior tongue (P < .05). Patients with preservation of the tip of the tongue or floor of the mouth had higher intelligibilities (P < .05). CONCLUSION: For the patients after glossectomy within the range of hemitongue, except for the type of reconstruction, the tumor site or excision extent of the tongue followed by the tumor size may be key factors in determining the postoperative articulation intelligibility.