| Literature DB >> 22291748 |
Magdalena Lachowska1, Ewa Osuch-Wójcikiewicz, Antoni Bruzgielewicz.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An analysis of long term voice quality outcomes of two different types of surgical intervention for Tis and T1 glottic carcinoma: laryngofissure conventional cordectomy and endoscopic laser CO(2) cordectomy, with or without additional radiation therapy.Entities:
Keywords: acoustic analysis of voice; glottic carcinoma; spectrography; voice quality
Year: 2011 PMID: 22291748 PMCID: PMC3258680 DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2011.20621
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Med Sci ISSN: 1734-1922 Impact factor: 3.318
Patients grouping scheme according to the treatment method – the surgery alone (laser or conventional cordectomy) or the surgery with additional radiotherapy (n = 46)
| Group | Treatment method | Number of patients |
|---|---|---|
| A | laser cordectomy | 19 |
| B | laser cordectomy + radiotherapy | 11 |
| C | laser cordectomy + radiotherapy + conventional cordectomy | 1 |
| D | conventional cordectomy or conventional cordectomy following laser surgery | 10 |
| E | conventional cordectomy + radiotheratpy | 5 |
Manner of voice production while speaking in free conversation, according to the method of the surgical treatment (conventional or laser cordec tomy) with or without additional radiotherapy (n = 46)
| Group | Voice production | |
|---|---|---|
| Unrestrained (number of patients) | Strained with visible hyperfunction of the laryngeal and neck muscles (number of patients) | |
| A | 9 | 10 |
| B | 4 | 7 |
| C | - | 1 |
| D | 1 | 9 |
| E | - | 5 |
| ABCDE | 14 | 32 |
| % of | 30.43% | 69.57% |
Figure 1Narrowband spectrograph of the sentence “Ten dzielny żołnierz był z nim razem” (The brave soldier stayed together with him) in a patient after endoscopic laser CO2 cordectomy of the right vocal fold
Figure 2Narrowband spectrograph of the sentence “Ten dzielny żołnierz był z nim razem” (The brave soldier stayed together with him) in a patient after conventional cordectomy of the left vocal fold
Degree of hoarseness based on the Yanagihara’s classification according to the method of the surgical treatment (conventional or laser cordectomy) with or without additional radiotherapy (n = 46)
| Group | Degree of hoarseness based on the Yanagihara’s classification | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I (number of patients) | II (number of patients) | III (number of patients) | IV (number of patients) | |
| A | 1 | 10 | 7 | 1 |
| B | – | 7 | 1 | 3 |
| C | – | – | – | 1 |
| D | – | – | 4 | 6 |
| E | – | – | 4 | 1 |
| ABCDE | 1 | 17 | 16 | 12 |
| % of | 2.17% | 36.96% | 34.78% | 26.09% |
Figure 3Narrowband spectrograph of the vowels /i/ /e/ /a/ in a patient after endoscopic laser CO2 cordectomy of the right vocal fold – grade I hoarseness
Figure 4Narrowband spectrograph of the vowels /i/ /e/ /a/ in a patient after endoscopic laser CO2 cordectomy of the right vocal fold – grade II hoarseness
Figure 5Narrowband spectrograph of the vowels /i/ /e/ /a/ in a patient after endoscopic laser CO2 cordectomy of the left vocal fold – grade III hoarseness
Figure 6Narrowband spectrograph of the vowels /i/ /e/ /a/ in a patient after conventional cordectomy of the right vocal fold – grade III hoarseness
Figure 7Narrowband spectrograph of the vowels /i/ /e/ /a/ in a patient after conventional cordectomy of the left vocal fold – grade IV hoarseness
Mean values of phonation intensity in normal and loud speaking according to the method of the surgical treatment (conventional or laser cordectomy) with or without additional radiotherapy (n = 46)
| Group | Mean intensity [dB] | SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal speaking | Loud speaking | Normal speaking | Loud speaking | |
| A | 66.37 | 81.00 | 2.69 | 3.02 |
| B | 67.09 | 81.91 | 2.39 | 3.42 |
| C | 64 | 76 | – | – |
| D | 64.40 | 77.30 | 1.96 | 3.02 |
| E | 64.80 | 77.20 | 3.27 | 4.32 |
| ABCDE | 65.89 | 79.89 | 2.65 | 3.73 |
Voice Handicap Index (VHI) according to the method of the surgical treatment (conventional or laser cordectomy) with or without additional radiotherapy (n = 46)
| Group | VHI | Mean points VHI | SD | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-30 pts | 31-60 pts | 61-120 pts | ||||||
| Number of patients | Mean points | Number of patients | Mean points | Number of patients | Mean points | |||
| A | 10 | 12.1 | 9 | 42.4 | – | – | 26.47 | 17.59 |
| B | 9 | 14.1 | 2 | 40 | – | – | 18.82 | 12.07 |
| C | 1 | 22 | – | – | – | – | 22 | – |
| D | 4 | 19.5 | 4 | 47.8 | 2 | 66 | 40.10 | 20.05 |
| E | – | – | 4 | 47 | 1 | 73 | 52.20 | 14.48 |
| ABCDE | 24 | 14.5 | 19 | 44.3 | 3 | 68.3 | 30.30 | 19.23 |
Evaluation of the cordectomy type (laser vs. conventional, the group A vs. D) influence on the acoustic analysis results
| Parameter | Group A | Group D |
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean value |
| SD | Mean value |
| SD | |||
| Fundamental frequency [Hz] | 150.29 | 17 | 23.23 | 124.40 | 10 | 33.56 | 0.1908 | 0.0257 |
| Range of Fo [semitones] | 13.37 | 19 | 2.54 | 10.80 | 10 | 3.19 | 0.3945 | 0.0253 |
| Phonation time [s] | 13.68 | 19 | 4.07 | 8.30 | 10 | 3.80 | 0.8694 | 0.0018 |
| Intensity of phonation in normal speaking [dB] | 66.37 | 19 | 2.69 | 64.40 | 10 | 1.96 | 0.3282 | 0.0513 |
| Intensity of phonation in loud speaking [dB] | 81.00 | 19 | 3.02 | 77.30 | 10 | 3.02 | 0.9467 | 0.0041 |
| VHI points | 26.47 | 19 | 17.59 | 40.10 | 10 | 20.05 | 0.6069 | 0.0694 |
p-values of < 0.05 are significant
Evaluation of the cordectomy type followed by radiotherapy (laser cordectomy with radiotherapy vs. conventional cordectomy with radiotherapy, group B vs. E) influence on acoustic analysis results
| Parameter | Group B | Group E |
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean value |
| SD | Mean value |
| SD | |||
| Fundamental frequency [Hz] | 152.50 | 10 | 35.85 | 119.80 | 5 | 33.85 | 0.9857 | 0.1141 |
| Range of Fo [semitones] | 11.50 | 10 | 2.55 | 11.67 | 3 | 1.15 | 0.3635 | 0.9164 |
| Phonation time [s] | 14.27 | 11 | 5.92 | 11.00 | 5 | 8.34 | 0.3459 | 0.3803 |
| Intensity of phonation in normal speaking [db] | 67.09 | 11 | 2.39 | 64.80 | 5 | 3.27 | 0.3811 | 0.1338 |
| Intensity of phonation in loud speaking [dB] | 81.91 | 11 | 3.42 | 77.20 | 5 | 4.32 | 0.4977 | 0.0334 |
| VHI points | 18.82 | 11 | 12.07 | 52.20 | 5 | 14.48 | 0.5824 | 0.0003 |
p-values of < 0.05 are significant
Evaluation of the cordectomy type with or without additional radiotherapy (group A and B vs. D and E) influence on acoustic analysis results
| Parameter | Group A and B | Group D and E |
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean value |
| SD | Mean value |
| SD | |||
| Fundamental frequency [Hz] | 151.11 | 27 | 27.90 | 122.87 | 15 | 32.50 | 0.4842 | 0.0051 |
| Range of Fo [semitones] | 12.72 | 29 | 2.66 | 11.00 | 13 | 2.83 | 0.7496 | 0.0639 |
| Phonation time [s] | 13.90 | 30 | 4.74 | 9.20 | 15 | 5.56 | 0.4525 | 0.0050 |
| Intensity of phonation in normal speaking [db] | 66.63 | 30 | 2.57 | 64.53 | 15 | 2.36 | 0.7578 | 0.0110 |
| Intensity of phonation in loud speaking [db] | 81.33 | 30 | 3.14 | 77.27 | 15 | 3.35 | 0.7447 | 0.0002 |
| VHI points | 23.67 | 30 | 16.01 | 44.13 | 15 | 18.79 | 0.4520 | 0.0004 |
p-values of < 0.05 are significant
Variation analysis of two factors
| Voice parameter | Factor |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Fundamental frequency | 1 | 8.142 | 0.0070 |
| 2 | 0.014 | 0.9078 | |
| 12 | 0.110 | 0.7421 | |
| Range of Fo | 1 | 1.390 | 0.2458 |
| 2 | 0.242 | 0.6258 | |
| 12 | 1.802 | 0.1874 | |
| Phonation time | 1 | 6.558 | 0.0142 |
| 2 | 0.946 | 0.3364 | |
| 12 | 0.390 | 0.5357 | |
| Intensity of phonation in normal speaking | 1 | 6.340 | 0.0158 |
| 2 | 0.440 | 0.5107 | |
| 12 | 0.036 | 0.8498 | |
| Intensity of phonation in loud speaking | 1 | 14.930 | 0.0004 |
| 2 | 0.138 | 0.7120 | |
| 12 | 0.215 | 0.6453 | |
| VHI | 1 | 17.787 | 0.0001 |
| 2 | 0.159 | 0.6921 | |
| 12 | 3.141 | 0.0838 |
p-values of < 0.05 are significant