Maeso-Plaza A, Dablanca-Blanco M, Ortega-Fernandez C, Ortega-Del Álamo P. Cicatricial posterior glottic stenosis. Our experience.
Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2016;
67:330-338. [PMID:
27063587 DOI:
10.1016/j.otorri.2016.01.008]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2015] [Revised: 01/17/2016] [Accepted: 01/21/2016] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
Presentation of the results obtained in the treatment of cicatricial posterior glottic stenosis.
METHODS
A retrospective study of 34 patients diagnosed and treated for cicatricial posterior glottic stenosis in our ENT Department.
RESULTS
In our series, 85.36% of our patients were decannulated. Of these, 80% of the patients with glottic stenosis were decannulated, while 92.9% of the patients with other associated laryngotracheal stenosis were paradoxically decannulated. Of all the patients, 70% required more than 1 surgical procedure, although most of these interventions were to resolve minor issues following our protocol. The number of subsequent interventions was determined by the location of the stenosis, with there being more interventions when the posterior glottic stenosis was associated with another type of laryngotracheal stenosis (p=.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The surgical results for treating cicatricial posterior glottic stenosis are quite positive. However, unlike other types of posterior glottic stenosis (such as neurogenic abductor paralysis), it requires a greater number of interventions to achieve definitive decannulation. Endoscopic procedures play an important role and represent our main tool.
Collapse