Welham NV, Choi SH, Dailey SH, Ford CN, Jiang JJ, Bless DM. Prospective multi-arm evaluation of surgical treatments for vocal fold scar and pathologic sulcus vocalis.
Laryngoscope 2011;
121:1252-60. [PMID:
21557241 DOI:
10.1002/lary.21780]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2010] [Revised: 02/09/2011] [Accepted: 02/09/2011] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of type I thyroplasty, injection laryngoplasty, and graft implantation for the treatment of vocal fold scar and pathologic sulcus vocalis.
STUDY DESIGN
Prospective, multi-arm, quasi-experimental research design.
METHODS
Twenty-eight patients with newly diagnosed vocal fold scar and/or pathologic sulcus vocalis were assigned to one of three treatment modalities: type I thyroplasty (n = 9), injection laryngoplasty (n = 9), and graft implantation (n = 10). Psychosocial, auditory-perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, and videostroboscopic data were collected pretreatment and at 1, 6, 12, and 18 months posttreatment.
RESULTS
Type I thyroplasty and graft implantation both resulted in reduced voice handicap with no concomitant improvement in auditory-perceptual, acoustic, aerodynamic, or vocal fold physiologic performance. Injection laryngoplasty resulted in no improvement on any vocal function index. Patients who underwent graft implantation exhibited the slowest improvement trajectory across the 18-month follow-up period.
CONCLUSIONS
A persistent challenge in this area is that no single treatment modality is successful for the majority of patients, and there is no evidence-based decision algorithm for matching a given treatment to a given patient. Progress therefore requires the identification and categorization of predictive clinical features that can drive evidence-based treatment assignment.
Collapse