| Literature DB >> 34274996 |
Marta Filauro1,2,3, Alberto Vallin1,2, Roberto Puxeddu4, Giorgio Peretti1,2, Elisa Marcenaro2, Francesco Missale5,6, Marco Fragale1,2, Francesco Mora1,2, Valeria Marrosu4, Claudio Sampieri1,2, Filippo Carta4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Bilateral adductor vocal cord paralysis (BAVCP) is a rare and challenging condition whose main consequence is reduction of airway patency at the glottic level, often causing respiratory distress, while vocal function tends to remain almost normal. We investigated the effect of transoral glottal widening on quality of life and decannulation rates in patients affected by BAVCP.Entities:
Keywords: Cordotomy; Glottis; Larynx; Laser; Vocal fold paralysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34274996 PMCID: PMC8486712 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-06971-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 0937-4477 Impact factor: 2.503
Fig. 1Draw that illustrates the surgical techniques adopted. VP vocal process, PC posterior cordotomy, MPA medial partial arytenopidectomy
Fig. 2Endoscopic pre-treatment (A, D), intraoperative (B, E) or post-treatment (C, F) pictures of two clinical cases managed with transoral CO2 laser posterior cordotomy alone (A–C) or with medial partial arytenoidectomy (D–F)
Clinical features of the cohort of patients
| Overall | |
|---|---|
| Hospital | |
| Center 1 (Genoa) | 19 (57.6%) |
| Center 2 (Cagliari) | 14 (42.4%) |
| Age | |
| Mean (SD) | 56.2 (15.1) |
| Median [min, max] | 59.0 [11.0, 77.0] |
| Gender | |
| F | 24 (72.7%) |
| M | 9 (27.3%) |
| Etiology | |
| Post-surgery | 27 (81.8%) |
| Idiopathic | 4 (12.1%) |
| Trauma | 1 (3.0%) |
| Post-surgery and Trauma | 1 (3.0%) |
| Medial partial arytenoidectomy | |
| No | 11 (33.3%) |
| Yes | 22 (66.7%) |
| Jet ventilation | |
| No | 26 (78.8%) |
| Yes | 7 (21.2%) |
| Tracheostomy | |
| No | 24 (72.7%) |
| Yes | 9 (27.3%) |
| Retreatments | |
| No | 27 (81.8%) |
| Yes | 6 (18.2%) |
| Decannulation | |
| Yes | 9 (27.3%) |
| No | 0 (0%) |
| No tracheostomy | 24 (72.7%) |
Summary statistics of preoperative (PRE), postoperative (POST) questionnaire results and the mean actual difference of paired evaluations (POST–PRE); p values by Wilcoxon test
| PRE | POST | Mean difference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 1.58 (0.969) | 1.00 (0) | − 0.58 (− 0.92, − 0.23) | 0.005 |
| Median [Min, Max] | 1.00 [1.00, 4.00] | 1.00 [1.00, 1.00] | ||
| D | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 3.55 (1.00) | 2.09 (1.01) | − 1.45 (− 1.84, − 1.07) | < 0.0001 |
| Median [min, max] | 4.00 [1.00, 5.00] | 2.00 [1.00, 4.00] | ||
| V | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 2.85 (1.00) | 2.64 (0.822) | − 0.21 (− 0.61, +0.18) | 0.31 |
| Median [min, max] | 3.00 [1.00, 5.00] | 2.00 [1.00, 4.00] | ||
| S | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 2.39 (0.998) | 1.82 (0.683) | − 0.58 (− 0.88, − 0.27) | 0.001 |
| Median [min, max] | 2.00 [1.00, 5.00] | 2.00 [1.00, 4.00] | ||
| ADVS | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 10.4 (2.57) | 7.52 (1.80) | − 2.85 (− 3.57, − 2.12) | < 0.0001 |
| Median [min, max] | 10.0 [7.00, 15.0] | 7.00 [5.00, 11.0] | ||
| EAT-10 | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 14.1 (11.4) | 8.67 (8.40) | − 5.42 (− 8.30, − 2.55) | 0.0005 |
| Median [min, max] | 13.0 [0, 40.0] | 8.00 [0, 29.0] | ||
| VHI-30 | ||||
| Mean (SD) | 54.4 (30.5) | 51.3 (27.2) | − 3.12 (− 9.80, +3.56) | 0.65 |
| Median [min, max] | 55.0 [3.00, 108] | 46.0 [12.0, 119] | ||
| PEF (%predicted) | ||||
| Mean (SD) | – | 53.7 (21.5) | – | – |
| Median [min, max] | – | 52.5 [12.2, 96.0] | ||
| Missing | – | 5 (15.2%) | ||
Fig. 3Box plots of ADVS (A, C), EAT-10 (B), andVHI-30 (D) questionnaire results; p values estimated by Wilcoxon test
Fig. 4Plots showing pre-treatment (PRE) and post-treatment (POST) median values with 95% CI of ADVS scores (A, B), EAT-10 scores (C, D), and VHI-30 scores (E, F) in different subgroups of patients according to etiology and synchronous partial arytenoidectomy. The main effect of each variable was tested by ordinal regression models, weighed by the timing effect (PRE vs POST); p values estimated by ANOVA type II Sums of Squares analysis
Fig. 5Kaplan–Maier curves showing the probability of retreatments for the whole cohort (A) or stratified by synchronous partial arytenoidectomy (B) and decannulation probability for the subgroup of patients with a tracheotomy at the time of the endoscopic procedure (C); p value estimated by log-rank test