Dergiler / Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi / 2018 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2

Long-Term Evaluation After Supracricoid Partial Laryngectomy

Sayfa
54–64
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

When SCPL patients were evaluated postoperatively in the long-term, using acoustic voice analysis, laryngostroboscopic examination and voice handicap index, even though they suffered from voice weaknesses, functional results were generally found to be ac- ceptable.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Supracricoid partial laryngectomy is one of the partial laryngectomy proce- dures designed to maintain adequate functionality.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Material and Methods: We as- sessed 26 patients with supracricoid partial laryngectomy (SCPL) with cricohyoidopexy, 9 patients with SCPL cricohyoidoepiglottopexy and 10 healthy individuals within our research.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:When SCPL patients were evaluated postoperatively in the long-term, using acoustic voice analysis, laryngostroboscopic examination and voice handicap index, even though they suffered from voice weaknesses, functional results were generally found to be ac- ceptable.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objective: Supracricoid partial laryngectomy is one of the partial laryngectomy proce- dures designed to maintain adequate functionality. We intend to determine the effects of voice, res- piration functions that effect life quality in the long term, and how much they differ based on the chosen surgical procedure after supracricoid partial laryngectomy. Material and Methods: We as- sessed 26 patients with supracricoid partial laryngectomy (SCPL) with cricohyoidopexy, 9 patients with SCPL cricohyoidoepiglottopexy and 10 healthy individuals within our research. All of the pa- tients were evaluated with acoustic and perceptual voice analysis, aspiration, dysphagia, voice hand- icap index, laryngostroboscopy one year after supracricoid partial laryngectomy with cricohyoidopexy or cricohyoidoepiglottopexy. Results: Thirty-five patients (34 male, 1 female) were included in the study group to determine the postoperative, long term functional effects of SCPL. We found that, even though patients suffered from disabilities related with voice, findings in fuctional results in supracricoid partial laryngectomy patients were favorable. Conclusion: As a conclusion, SCPL could be performed in chosen cases of advanced laryngeal malignancies as an alternative sur- gical method, preserving swallowing, speaking and swallowing functions, providing acceptable func- tional results as expressed by patients. When SCPL patients were evaluated postoperatively in the long-term, using acoustic voice analysis, laryngostroboscopic examination and voice handicap index, even though they suffered from voice weaknesses, functional results were generally found to be ac- ceptable.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇİFTÇİ, E., KARASALİHOĞLU, A. R., YAĞIZ, R., TAŞ, A., GÜVEN, S. G., ADALI, M. K., KOTEN, M., UZUN, C., KOÇYİĞİT, M., ÖRTEKİN, S. G. (2018). Long-Term Evaluation After Supracricoid Partial Laryngectomy. Kulak Burun Boğaz ve Baş Boyun Cerrahisi, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 2, 54–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/346764

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Schindler A, Favero E, Nudo S, Spadola- Bisetti M, Ottaviani F, Schindler O. Voice after supracricoid laryngectomy: subjective, objec- tive and self-assessment data. Logoped Pho- niatr Vocol 2005;30(3-4):114-9
  2. Karasalihoglu AR, Yagiz R, Tas A, Uzun C, Adali MK, Koten M. Supracricoid partial laryn- gectomy with cricohyoidopexy and cricohyoi- doepiglottopexy: functional and oncological results. J Laryngol Otol 2004;118(9):671- 5
  3. Weinstein GS, El-Sawy MM, Ruiz C, Dooley P, Chalian A, El-Sayed MM, et al. Laryngeal preservation with supracricoid partial laryn- gectomy results in improved quality of life when compared with total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 2001;111(2):191-9
  4. Pinar E, Imre A, Calli C, Oncel S, Katilmis H. Supracricoid partial laryngectomy: analyses of oncologic and functional outcomes. Otolaryn- gol Head Neck Surg 2012;147(6):1093- 8
  5. Minifie FD, Moore GP, Hicks DM. Disorders of voice, speech and language. In: Ballanger JJ, Snow JB, eds. Otolaryngology Head And Neck Surgery. 15th ed. Baltimore. Williams & Wilkins; 1996. p.438-66
  6. Kılıç MA, Okur E, Yıldırım İ, Öğüt F, Denizoğlu İ, Kızılay A, et al. [Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Voice Handicap Index]. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg 2008;18(3):139- 47
  7. Uloza V. Effects on voice by endolaryngeal mi- crosurgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1999;256(6):312-5
  8. De Bodt MS, Wuyts FL, Van de Heyning PH, Croux C. Test-retest study of the GRBAS scale: influence of experience and professional background on perceptual rat- ing of voice quality. J Voice 1997;11(1):74- 80
  9. Van Lierde KM, Schepers S, Timmermans L, Verhoye I, Van Cauweberge P. The impact of mandibular advacement on articulation, reso- nance and voice characteristics in Flemish speaking adults: a pilot study. Int J Oral Max- illofac Surg 2006;35(2):137-44
  10. Schindler A, Pizzorni N, Mozzanica F, Fantini M, Ginocchio D, Bertolin A, et al. Functional outcomes after supracricoid laryngectomy: what do we not know and what do we need to know? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273 (11):3459-75
  11. Crevier-Buchman L, Laccourreye O, Wuyts FL, Monfrais-Pfauwadel MC, Pillot C, Brasnu D. Comparison and evolution of perceptual and acoustic characteristics of voice after supracricoid partial laryngectomy with crico-hyoidoepiglottopexy. Acta Otolaryngol 1998;118(4):594-9
  12. Bron L, Pasche P, Brossard E, Monnier P, Schweizer V. Functional analysis after supracricoid partial laryngectomy with crico- hyoidoepiglot