PURPOSE: In this study, the authors examined changes in tongue motion caused by glossectomy surgery. A speech task that involved subtle changes in tongue-tip positioning (the motion from /i/ to /s/) was measured. The hypothesis was that patients would have limited motion on the tumor (resected) side and would compensate with greater motion on the nontumor side in order to elevate the tongue tip and blade for /s/. METHOD: Velocity fields were extracted from tagged magnetic resonance images in the left, middle, and right tongue of 3 patients and 10 controls. Principal components (PCs) analysis quantified motion differences and distinguished between the subject groups. RESULTS: PCs 1 and 2 represented variance in (a) size and independence of the tongue tip, and (b) direction of motion of the tip, body, or both. Patients and controls were correctly separated by a small number of PCs. CONCLUSIONS: Motion of the tumor slice was different between patients and controls, but the nontumor side of the patients' tongues did not show excessive or adaptive motion. Both groups contained apical and laminal /s/ users, and 1 patient created apical /s/ in a highly unusual manner.
PURPOSE: In this study, the authors examined changes in tongue motion caused by glossectomy surgery. A speech task that involved subtle changes in tongue-tip positioning (the motion from /i/ to /s/) was measured. The hypothesis was that patients would have limited motion on the tumor (resected) side and would compensate with greater motion on the nontumor side in order to elevate the tongue tip and blade for /s/. METHOD: Velocity fields were extracted from tagged magnetic resonance images in the left, middle, and right tongue of 3 patients and 10 controls. Principal components (PCs) analysis quantified motion differences and distinguished between the subject groups. RESULTS:PCs 1 and 2 represented variance in (a) size and independence of the tongue tip, and (b) direction of motion of the tip, body, or both. Patients and controls were correctly separated by a small number of PCs. CONCLUSIONS: Motion of the tumor slice was different between patients and controls, but the nontumor side of the patients' tongues did not show excessive or adaptive motion. Both groups contained apical and laminal /s/ users, and 1 patient created apical /s/ in a highly unusual manner.
Authors: B R Pauloski; J A Logemann; L A Colangelo; A W Rademaker; F M McConnel; M A Heiser; S Cardinale; D Shedd; D Stein; Q Beery; E Myers; J Lewin; M Haxer; R Esclamado Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: J A Logemann; B R Pauloski; A W Rademaker; F M McConnel; M A Heiser; S Cardinale; D Shedd; D Stein; Q Beery; J Johnson Journal: J Speech Hear Res Date: 1993-10
Authors: Fangxu Xing; Maureen Stone; Tessa Goldsmith; Jerry L Prince; Georges El Fakhri; Jonghye Woo Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: Jonghye Woo; Fangxu Xing; Jerry L Prince; Maureen Stone; Jordan R Green; Tessa Goldsmith; Timothy G Reese; Van J Wedeen; Georges El Fakhri Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Fangxu Xing; Jonghye Woo; Junghoon Lee; Emi Z Murano; Maureen Stone; Jerry L Prince Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: Euna Lee; Fangxu Xing; Sung Ahn; Timothy G Reese; Ruopeng Wang; Jordan R Green; Nazem Atassi; Van J Wedeen; Georges El Fakhri; Jonghye Woo Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Jonghye Woo; Fangxu Xing; Jerry L Prince; Maureen Stone; Arnold D Gomez; Timothy G Reese; Van J Wedeen; Georges El Fakhri Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 13.828