Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Outcomes and predictors of surgical management in type 1 laryngeal cleft swallowing dysfunction.

Laryngoscope 2016 December
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To examine the effect of and predict the success of type 1 laryngeal cleft (LC-1) augmentation through swallowing evaluations.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart analysis.

METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with LC-1s underwent interarytenoid injection laryngoplasty (IL) and were examined. The median age at IL was 9 months. Swallowing evaluations were performed pre- and postoperatively using fiberoptic endoscopic examination of swallowing or modified barium swallow. The presence of aspiration or penetrations at various consistencies was recorded. McNemar's tests were used to detect changes in swallowing pre- and postoperatively. Logistic regression was used to assess factors affecting the odds of postoperative success.

RESULTS: Preoperatively, 89.7% of patients demonstrated penetration or aspiration. Post-IL, 69.1% were safe for thins, and 75% showed improvement in swallowing. Postoperatively, there was a significant reduction in patients experiencing problems with thin liquids (P < 0.001) and in those with frank or silent aspiration (P < 0.001). Patients with penetrations on thin liquids had higher likelihood of a successful IL (odds ratio [OR] = 3.68, P = 0.021). The probability of success with silent aspiration at any consistency was significantly decreased (OR = 0.26, P = 0.015). Fifteen patients underwent formal endoscopic surgical repair, and 90.0% were safe with thin consistencies postoperatively.

CONCLUSION: A large proportion of patients with LC-1 and associated swallowing dysfunctions respond favorably to IL and formal repair. Children who demonstrated penetration with thin liquids had a higher rate of swallowing dysfunction resolution post-IL; whereas patients demonstrating silent aspiration had poorer responses to IL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 126:2838-2843, 2016.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app