Comparison of Swallowing Act Videofluoroscopy after Open and Laser Partial Supraglottic Laryngectomy | ||
| Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 30، شماره 6 - شماره پیاپی 101، بهمن و اسفند 2018، صفحه 315-319 اصل مقاله (484.69 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/ijorl.2018.27445.1900 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mario Bilic1؛ Lana Kovac-Bilic1؛ Selma Hodzic-Redzic* 2؛ Drago Prgomet2 | ||
| 1Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. | ||
| 2Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Clinical Hospital Center Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcomes of swallowing act detected by videofluoroscopy of two different techniques in the treatment of laryngeal carcinoma. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted on 41 patients undergoing two supraglottic laryngectomy techniques. The research population was assigned into two groups of open and laser supraglottic laryngectomy, including 21 and 20 patients, respectively. Results: Food residue was present in most of the patients in the open laryngectomy group. Aspiration of the liquid and solid contrasts was observed in 16 and 4 patients, respectively. In the laser laryngectomy group undergoing a partial supraglottic laryngectomy via carbon dioxide (CO2) laser, aspiration was recorded in only six patients. There was a statistically significant difference between these two groups regarding the presence of aspiration as a marker of a bad functional outcome. Conclusion: Techniques that include the endoscopic removal of the tumor via CO2 laser result in good oncologic and functional outcomes, along with reduced postoperative morbidity and mortality. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Deglutition؛ Deglutition disorders؛ Endoscopy؛ Gas؛ Laryngeal neoplasms؛ Laryngectomy؛ Lasers | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Prgomet D, Bumber Z, Bilić M, Svoren E, Katić V, Poje G. Videofluoroscopy of the swallowing act after partial supraglottic laryngectomy by CO(2) laser. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2002; 259(8): 399-403.
2. Agrawal A, Moon J, Davis RK, Sakr WA, Giri SP, Valentino J, et al. Southwest Oncology Group. Transoral carbon dioxide laser supraglottic laryngectomy and irradiation in stage I, II, and III squamous cell carcinoma of the supraglottic larynx: report of Southwest Oncology Group Phase 2 Trial S9709.Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007; 133(10):1044-50.
3. Davis RK, Shapshay SM, Strong MS, Hyams VJ. Transoral partial supraglottic resection using the CO2 laser.Laryngoscope. 1983; 93(4):429-32.
4. Davis RK, Kelly SM, Hayes J. Endoscopic CO2 laser excisional biopsy of early supraglottic cancer.Laryngoscope. 1991; 101(6 Pt 1):680-3.
5. Peretti G, Piazza C, Cattaneo A, De Benedetto L, Martin E, Nicolai P. Comparison of functional outcomes after endoscopic versus open-neck supraglottic laryngectomies. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2006; 115(11):827-32.
6. Sasaki CT, Leder SB, Acton LM, Maune S.Comparison of the glottic closure reflex in traditional "open" versus endoscopic laser supraglottic laryngectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2006; 115(2):93-6.
7. Pérez Delgado L, El-Uali Abeida M, de Miguel García F, Astier Peña P, Herrera Tolosana S, Lisbona Alquézar MP, et al.CO2 laser surgery of supraglottic carcinoma: our experience over 6 years.Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2010; 61(1):12-8.
8. Chiesa Estomba CM, Betances Reinoso FA, Lorenzo Lorenzo AI, Fariña Conde JL, Araujo Nores J, Santidrian Hidalgo C. Functional outcomes of supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma treated by transoral laser microsurgery compared with horizontal supraglottic laryngectomy in patients younger and older than 65 years. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2016; 36(6): 450–8.
9. Kreuzer SH, Schima W, Schober E, Pokieser P, Kofler G, Lechner G, et al. Complications after laryngeal surgery: videofluoroscopic evaluation of 120 patients.ClinRadiol. 2000; 55(10):775-81.
10. Bumber Z, Svoren E. Videofluoroscopy of the swallowing act following partial supraglottic laryngectomy. Laryngorhinootologie. 1990; 69(4): 217-20.
11.Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Piccinini A, Grammatica A, Chiesi A, Bergamini G, Luppi MP et al.Voice and swallowing after partial laryngectomy: factors influencing outcome.Head Neck. 2013; 35(2):214-9.
12.Breunig C, Benter P, Seidl RO, Coordes A. Predictable swallowing function after open horizontal supraglottic partial laryngectomy.Auris Nasus Larynx. 2016;43(6):658-65.
13. Logemann JA, Gibbons P, Rademaker AW, Pauloski BR, Kahrilas PJ, Bacon M, et al. J Speech Hear Res, 37 (1994) 965.
14. Weinstein GS, O'Malley BW Jr, Snyder W, Hockstein NG. Transoral robotic surgery: supraglottic partial laryngectomy. Ann OtolRhinolLaryngol. 2007; 116 (1):19–23.
15. Ansarin M, Zorzi S, Massaro MA,Tagliabue M, Proh M, Giugliano G, et al.Transoral robotic surgery vs transoral laser microsurgery for resection of supraglottic cancer: a pilot surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2014; 10 (1):107–12.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 522 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 448 |
||