Postlaryngectomy prosthetic voice rehabilitation outcomes in a consecutive cohort of 232 patients over a 13‐year period

Background With the increasing necessity for total laryngectomy (TL) after prior (chemo)radiotherapy, prosthetic vocal rehabilitation outcomes might have changed. Methods Retrospective cohort study including all patients laryngectomized between 2000 and 2012 with a voice prosthesis (VP) in the Nethe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Head & neck 2019-03, Vol.41 (3), p.623-631
Hauptverfasser: Petersen, Japke F., Lansaat, Liset, Timmermans, Adriana J., van der Noort, Vincent, Hilgers, Frans J. M., van den Brekel, Michiel W. M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background With the increasing necessity for total laryngectomy (TL) after prior (chemo)radiotherapy, prosthetic vocal rehabilitation outcomes might have changed. Methods Retrospective cohort study including all patients laryngectomized between 2000 and 2012 with a voice prosthesis (VP) in the Netherlands Cancer Institute. Results Median device lifetimes of the standard Provox2 and Vega VPs are 63 and 66 days, respectively, and for the problem‐solving ActiValve Light and Strong VPs 143 and 186 days, respectively. In multivariable analysis, salvage TL and TL for a dysfunctional larynx (compared to primary TL) were associated with a shorter device lifetime. Almost half of the patients (48%) experienced tracheoesophageal puncture tract‐related problems, and this concerned 12% of all VP replacements. Conclusions Compared to historical cohorts, device lifetimes of regular Provox2 and Vega voice prostheses have decreased. Complications are not occurring more frequently but affect more patients. Nevertheless, the clinical reliability and validity of prosthetic voice rehabilitation is still sound.
ISSN:1043-3074
1097-0347
DOI:10.1002/hed.25364