Jennifer Siu1, Samantha Tam2, Kevin Fung2. 1. School of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To critically review current literature comparing interventional approaches for unilateral vocal fold paralysis. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature. METHODS: All English-language literature published in the PubMed database was eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were: 1) the major topic must be a direct comparison of outcomes in interventions for unilateral vocal fold paralysis, 2) the subjects were 18 years or older, and 3) it was original research. Studies involving treatment of bilateral vocal fold paralysis and nonprocedural interventions were excluded. Included studies were categorized according to level of evidence. Outcomes analyzed were acoustic and aerodynamic measures, auditory perceptive evaluation, laryngoscopic findings, and complications. RESULTS: Of the 504 studies retrieved from the search strategy, 17 studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, four interventional approaches were used for treatment of unilateral vocal fold paralysis: medialization thyroplasty, injection laryngoplasty, arytenoid adduction, and laryngeal reinnervation. Aside from some select improvements in single outcome parameters, overall, the majority of studies show no difference in improvement of outcomes between techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Four surgical interventions for unilateral vocal fold paralysis are available for treatment of unilateral vocal cord paralysis. Multiple studies show favorable outcomes, but no significant differences between treatment arms based on perceptual, acoustic, quality of life, and laryngoscopic outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 126:1616-1624, 2016.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To critically review current literature comparing interventional approaches for unilateral vocal fold paralysis. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature. METHODS: All English-language literature published in the PubMed database was eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were: 1) the major topic must be a direct comparison of outcomes in interventions for unilateral vocal fold paralysis, 2) the subjects were 18 years or older, and 3) it was original research. Studies involving treatment of bilateral vocal fold paralysis and nonprocedural interventions were excluded. Included studies were categorized according to level of evidence. Outcomes analyzed were acoustic and aerodynamic measures, auditory perceptive evaluation, laryngoscopic findings, and complications. RESULTS: Of the 504 studies retrieved from the search strategy, 17 studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, four interventional approaches were used for treatment of unilateral vocal fold paralysis: medialization thyroplasty, injection laryngoplasty, arytenoid adduction, and laryngeal reinnervation. Aside from some select improvements in single outcome parameters, overall, the majority of studies show no difference in improvement of outcomes between techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Four surgical interventions for unilateral vocal fold paralysis are available for treatment of unilateral vocal cord paralysis. Multiple studies show favorable outcomes, but no significant differences between treatment arms based on perceptual, acoustic, quality of life, and laryngoscopic outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 126:1616-1624, 2016.
Authors: Yarah M Haidar; Ronald Sahyouni; Omid Moshtaghi; Beverly Y Wang; Hamid R Djalilian; John C Middlebrooks; Sunil P Verma; Harrison W Lin Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: F Granato; F Martelli; L V Comini; P Luparello; S Coscarelli; O Le Seac; S Carucci; P Graziani; R Santoro; G Alderotti; M R Barillari; Giuditta Mannelli Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Vera Matievics; Adam Bach; Balazs Sztano; Zsofia Bere; Zoltan Tobias; Paul F Castellanos; Andreas H Mueller; Laszló Rovo Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Veronika Birk; Stefan Kniesburges; Marion Semmler; David A Berry; Christopher Bohr; Michael Döllinger; Anne Schützenberger Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: G Desuter; M Dedry; B Schaar; J van Lith-Bijl; P P van Benthem; E V Sjögren Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 2.503