Literature DB >> 20734017

[Voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Initial clinical experience with the Provox-Vega® voice prosthesis and the SmartInserter® system].

K J Lorenz1, H Maier.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Voice prostheses have considerably improved the success of voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy and are the treatment of choice in many hospitals. Provox® voice prostheses are the most commonly used devices for voice restoration in Europe. Their benefits in terms of voice quality and ease of use are well documented in the literature. In March 2009, the third generation of Provox voice prostheses became available under the name of Provox-Vega®. This prosthesis features major changes in design and is supplied with the new SmartInserter® insertion device. MATERIAL AND PATIENTS: Nineteen patients who were receiving follow-up care at our department and had been using voice prostheses for an extended period of time were treated with Provox-Vega® prostheses after they gave their written informed consent. The patients completed a structured questionnaire covering the subjective evaluation of voice quality, phonation times and dynamic ranges. We also asked our patients whether they felt uncomfortable during prosthesis replacement procedures. In addition, we asked our medical professionals to evaluate the ease of use of the new insertion device.
RESULTS: The Provox-Vega® prosthesis was found to be superior to other prostheses in terms of voice quality, loudness and pitch modulation. It helped patients improve mean phonation time from 11.3 to 15.3 seconds and increase the dynamic range by 4.7 dB. Our medical professionals reported that the insertion device was easier to use and quicker to replace.
CONCLUSIONS: Provox-Vega® prostheses were found to improve voice quality and phonation times. Patients do not feel uncomfortable during replacement procedures. Following an appropriate period of familiarisation with the SmartInserter®, we found that the Vega system is quick and easy to use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20734017     DOI: 10.1007/s00106-010-2169-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HNO        ISSN: 0017-6192            Impact factor:   1.284


  25 in total

1.  [Voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy with the Provox voice prosthesis. Surgical and technical aspects].

Authors:  F J Hilgers; A J Balm; R T Gregor
Journal:  HNO       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Groningen prosthesis for voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy.

Authors:  A A Annyas; H F Nijdam; J R Escajadillo; H F Mahieu; H Leever
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci       Date:  1984-02

3.  Incidence of tracheo-oesophageal fistulas after primary voice rehabilitation with the Provox or the Eska-Herrmann voice prosthesis.

Authors:  W J Issing; S Fuchshuber; M Wehner
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Development and clinical evaluation of a second-generation voice prosthesis (Provox 2), designed for anterograde and retrograde insertion.

Authors:  F J Hilgers; A H Ackerstaff; A J Balm; I B Tan; N K Aaronson; J O Persson
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 1.494

5.  Voice rehabilitation with Provox2 voice prosthesis following total laryngectomy for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Tomonori Terada; Nobuo Saeki; Kunichika Toh; Nobuhiro Uwa; Kosuke Sagawa; Sadamu Takayasu; Masafumi Sakagami
Journal:  Auris Nasus Larynx       Date:  2006-11-29       Impact factor: 1.863

6.  In situ lifetime, causes for replacement, and complications of the Provox voice prosthesis.

Authors:  O Laccourreye; M Ménard; L Crevier-Buchman; V Couloigner; D Brasnu
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Investigation of tracheoesophageal voice prosthesis leakage patterns: patient's self-report versus clinician's confirmation.

Authors:  Lynn M Acton; Douglas A Ross; Clarence T Sasaki; Steven B Leder
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.147

8.  Functional outcome after surgery for prevention of pharyngospasms in tracheoesophageal speakers. Part I: Speech characteristics.

Authors:  E D Blom; B R Pauloski; R C Hamaker
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 9.  [Surgical treatment of enlarged trachoesophageal puncture with and without supraesophageal reflux : case report and review of literature].

Authors:  K J Lorenz; H Maier
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  [Coincidence of fistula enlargement and supra-oesophageal reflux in patients after laryngectomy and prosthetic voice restoration].

Authors:  K J Lorenz; T Ehrhart; L Grieser; H Maier
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.284

View more
  6 in total

1.  Provox 2® and Provox Vega® device life-time: a case-crossover study with multivariate analysis of possible influential factors and duration.

Authors:  Miguel Mayo-Yáñez; Irma Cabo-Varela; Loredana Dovalo-Carballo; Christian Calvo-Henríquez; Alejandro Martínez-Morán; Jesús Herranz González-Botas
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  The development and treatment of periprosthetic leakage after prosthetic voice restoration. A literature review and personal experience part I: the development of periprosthetic leakage.

Authors:  Kai J Lorenz
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  [A novel puncture instrument: the Provox-Vega® puncture set. Its use in voice prosthesis insertion following laryngectomy].

Authors:  K J Lorenz; F M Hilgers; H Maier
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  Molecular Characterization of Fungal Colonization on the Provox™ Tracheoesophageal Voice Prosthesis in Post Laryngectomy Patients.

Authors:  Hasti Kamali Sarvestani; Roshanak Daie Ghazvini; Seyed Jamal Hashemi; Mohsen Gerami Shoar; Saham Ansari; Zahra Rafat; Aslan Ahmadi; Pedram Borghei; Miad Elahi; Abbas Rahimi Foroushani; Muhammad Ibrahim Getso; Shima Aboutalebian; Fatemeh Safari; Pegah Ardi
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.429

5.  Device life of the Provox Vega voice prosthesis.

Authors:  Kelli L Hancock; Nadine R Lawson; Elizabeth C Ward
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Are modern voice prostheses better? A lifetime comparison of 749 voice prostheses.

Authors:  P Kress; P Schäfer; F P Schwerdtfeger; S Rösler
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-06-29       Impact factor: 2.503

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.