Endoscopic posterior cricoid reduction: A surgical method to improve posterior glottic diastasis

Objectives/Hypothesis Describe the preoperative evaluation of patients with glottic diastasis who are candidates for endoscopic posterior cricoid reduction (EPCR) and their perioperative and postoperative surgical and voice outcomes, and validate the aerodynamic benefit of EPCR using computation fluid dynamics (CFD)‐based modeling from computed tomography (CT) scans. Study Design Retrospective case series. Methods Thirteen patients who underwent EPCR were followed from 2013 to 2017. They received a preoperative voice evaluation, microlaryngoscopy and bronchoscopy, dynamic voice CT (performed on patients seen from 2014 to study completion), and postoperative voice evaluation (n = 12). Postoperative inpatient days, complications, and postoperative endoscopic intervention were collected. To validate the aerodynamic benefit of EPCR, CFD modeling was carried out on one patient. Results Thirteen patients (nine females, nine with intubation injury, and four with post–airway reconstruction dysphonia) underwent EPCR at a mean age of 11.0 years. The mean preoperative and postoperative Pediatric Voice handicap Index scores were 53.8 and 33.8, respectively (P = .006). Mean maximum phonation time preoperatively and postoperatively was 5.3 and 6.7, respectively (P = .04). Of eight patients who underwent preoperative CT imaging, all demonstrated a posterior gap. Modeling demonstrated a change in flow and pressure. The mean hospital stay was 2.4 days. Nine patients underwent postoperative endoscopic intervention, and one experienced a complication that resolved with intervention. Conclusions Patients who underwent EPCR for dysphonia following intubation or airway reconstruction showed improvements in vocal efficiency, loudness, and perceived voice handicapping. Their hospital stay was brief, with few complications. CFD modeling corroborated these clinical findings. EPCR thus warrants consideration in the management of patients with posterior glottic diastasis. Level of Evidence 4 Laryngoscope, 129:S1–S9, 2019