| Literature DB >> 32619273 |
Abstract
Entities:
Keywords: Modified arytenoid adduction; titanium implant; type I thryroplasty
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32619273 PMCID: PMC7689740 DOI: 10.1002/lary.28865
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Laryngoscope ISSN: 0023-852X Impact factor: 3.325
Patient Characteristics and Electromyography Findings.
| Age | Primary Diseases | Electromyography Findings | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case 1 | 83 | Aortic dissection | Reinnervation potential |
| Case 2 | 44 | Aortic dissection | Reinnervation potential |
| Case 3 | 63 | Esophageal cancer | Decreased MUP |
| Case 4 | 74 | Aortic dissection | Decreased MUP |
| Case 5 | 74 | Idiopathic | Decreased MUP |
| Case 6 | 70 | Thyroid cancer | Denervation potential |
| Case 7 | 77 | Aortic dissection | Decreased MUP |
| Case 8 | 55 | Aortic dissection | Denervation potential |
| Case 9 | 69 | Aortic dissection | Decreased MUP |
| Case 10 | 70 | Idiopathic | Denervation potential, decreased MUP |
MUP = motor unit potential.
Comparison Between Pre‐ and Postoperative Test Results Via a Statistical Analysis.
| Preoperative (mean ± SD) | Postoperative (mean ± SD) |
| Mean in Japanese Adult Males | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPT (s) | 1.7 (±0.9) | 22.7 (±6.0) | <.01 | 16.9 |
| MFR (ml/s) | 1098.9 (± 420.5) | 165.5 (±32.4) | <.01 | 170 |
| SFF (Hz) |
| 145.7(±21.2) | — | 132.0 (±19.7) |
| PR (semitone) |
| 21.7 (±4.5) | — | 22 |
| VHI | 60.9 | 10.4 | <.01 | |
| Acoustic analysis | ||||
| Jitter % |
| 0.53 (±0.18) | — | 0.528 (±0.25) |
| Shimmer % |
| 2.54 (±1.06) | — | 2.768 (±0.97) |
| NHR |
| 0.12 (±0.02) | — | 0.139 (±0.01) |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n=10).
MFR = mean flow rate; MPT = maximum phonation time; NHR = noise‐to‐harmonic ratio; PR = pitch range; SD = standard deviation; SFF = speech fundamental frequency; VHI = voice handicap index.
Unmeasurable.
Value averaged from the data of 74 individuals aged 51 years or older.14
Acoustic analysis for normal voices using a multi‐dimensional voice program.15
Figure 1The concept behind the treatment of unilateral vocal fold palsy. Vocal fold reconstruction to its physiological state during phonation involves compensation of the fixation of the vocal fold anteriorly, reforming its vibratory portion via type I thyroplasty, fixing the vocal fold posteriorly at adduction, and providing adequate tension on the vocal fold via arytenoid adduction. *Anterior notch. AMPM = all muscles preserved method; TMLI = titanium medialization laryngoplasty implant.
Figure 2Titanium medialization laryngoplasty implant. (Left side: scheme). The adjustment to achieve medialization is performed by molding the implant at a suitable site. (i) Handle. (ii) Medialization part. (a) This place adjusts the medialization of the vocal fold anteriorly and carries out compensation of the work of the thyroarytenoid muscle. (b) Adjusting the width and distance that carries out the medialization of the vocal fold here reforms the vibratory portion of the vocal fold. When the implant bends along the line imprinted on it, the medialization part is at a 15° incline to the handle. The implant is bent according to the position of the palsied vocal fold.
Figure 3Fixation of the titanium medialization laryngoplasty implant (left side: scheme). (Left) Implant fixation to the thyroid cartilage by threading nylon sutures through two holes in its handle. (Right) The view of the surgical field. * = anterior notch.
Figure 5The characteristic of TMLI. Multi‐reconstruction computed tomography image in a patient with left vocal fold palsy (at the time of phonation). Right vocal fold (sagittal image): The right vocal fold is presumed that the arytenoid adduction surgery was performed to treat Right vocal fold palsy. Coronal image: Atrophy of the left vocal fold. Left vocal fold (sagittal image): Palsied vocal fold. The angle between the vocal fold and thyroid cartilage can differ. When the angle of a first valley fold changes, the TMLI is maintained parallel to the vocal fold. TMLI = titanium medialization laryngoplasty implant.