BACKGROUND: Enlargement of the tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) is a challenging complication after laryngectomy with TEP. We sought to estimate the rate of enlarged puncture, associated pneumonia rates, potential risk factors, and conservative treatments excluding complete surgical TEP closure. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted (1978-2008). A summary risk estimate was calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis model. RESULTS: Twenty-seven peer-reviewed manuscripts were included. The rate of enlarged puncture and/or leakage around the prosthesis was reported in 23 articles (range, 1% to 29%; summary risk estimate, 7.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8% to 9.6%). Temporary removal of the prosthesis and TEP-site injections were the most commonly reported conservative treatments. Prosthetic diameter (p = .076) and timing of TEP (p = .297) were analyzed as risk factors; however, radiotherapy variables were inconsistently reported. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of enlarged puncture seems relatively low, but it remains a rehabilitative challenge. Future research should clearly establish risk factors for enlarged puncture and optimal conservative management.
BACKGROUND: Enlargement of the tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) is a challenging complication after laryngectomy with TEP. We sought to estimate the rate of enlarged puncture, associated pneumonia rates, potential risk factors, and conservative treatments excluding complete surgical TEP closure. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted (1978-2008). A summary risk estimate was calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis model. RESULTS: Twenty-seven peer-reviewed manuscripts were included. The rate of enlarged puncture and/or leakage around the prosthesis was reported in 23 articles (range, 1% to 29%; summary risk estimate, 7.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8% to 9.6%). Temporary removal of the prosthesis and TEP-site injections were the most commonly reported conservative treatments. Prosthetic diameter (p = .076) and timing of TEP (p = .297) were analyzed as risk factors; however, radiotherapy variables were inconsistently reported. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of enlarged puncture seems relatively low, but it remains a rehabilitative challenge. Future research should clearly establish risk factors for enlarged puncture and optimal conservative management.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: M J Ferrer Ramírez; F Guallart Doménech; S Brotons Durbán; M Carrasco Llatas; E Estellés Ferriol; R López Martínez Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Vincent P Marin; Kristen B Pytynia; Howard N Langstein; Kristina R Dahlstrom; Qingyi Wei; Erich M Sturgis Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Sarah A Gitomer; Katherine A Hutcheson; Brandon L Christianson; Madeleine B Samuelson; Denise A Barringer; Dianna B Roberts; Amy C Hessel; Randal S Weber; Jan S Lewin; Mark E Zafereo Journal: Head Neck Date: 2016-07-09 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Katherine A Hutcheson; Clare P Alvarez; Denise A Barringer; Michael E Kupferman; Peter R Lapine; Jan S Lewin Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 3.497