Scarring of the vocal folds leads to a deterioration of the highly complex micro-structure with consecutively impaired vibratory pattern and glottic insufficiency. The resulting dysphonia is predominantly characterized by a reduced vocal capacity. Despite the considerable progress in understanding of the underlying pathophysiology, the treatment of scarred vocal folds is still an unresolved chapter in laryngology and phonosurgery. Essential for a successful treatment is an individual, multi-dimensional concept that comprises the whole armamentarium of surgical and non-surgical (i.p. voice therapy) modalities. An ideal approach would be to soften the scar, because the reduced pliability and consequently the increased vibratory rigidity impede the easiness of vibration. The chosen phonosurgical method is determined by the main clinical feature: Medialization techniques for the treatment of glottic gap, or epithelium freeing techniques for improvement of vibration characteristics often combined with injection augmentation or implantation. In severe cases, buccal mucosa grafting can be an option. New developments, include treatment with anxiolytic lasers, laser technology with ultrafine excision/ablation properties avoiding coagulation (Picosecond infrared laser, PIRL), or techniques of tissue engineering. However, despite the promising results by in vitro experiments, animal studies and first clinical trials, the step into clinical routine application has yet to be taken.

Objectives/Hypothesis: This report describes a comparative study of objective voice evaluation using a multiparametric protocol including aerodynamic parameters and linear and nonlinear acoustic parameters recorded on an EVA® workstation and perceptual voice analysis by a jury. Study Design: A total of 449 samples were retrospectively selected including 391 patients with pathological voices (308 women and 141 men) and 58 controls with normal voices (38 women and 20 men). A prospective complementary study concerning 43 female patients and 3 controls is presented. Methods: Objective measures included fundamental frequency (Fo), intensity, jitter, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), Lyapunov coefficient (Lya), oral airflow (OAF), estimated subglottic pressure (ESGP), maximum phonatory time (MPT) and vocal range. A jury of 4 experienced listeners was instructed to classify voice samples (continuous speech) according to the G (overall dysphonia) component of the GRBAS score on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) secondarily transformed in a scale ranging from 0 for normal to 3 for severe dysphonia. Results: It was shown that a nonlinear combination of only 7 parameters in women (vocal range, Lya, ESGP, MPT, OAF, SNR, and Fo) and 6 parameters in men (vocal range, Lya, OAF, ESGP, Fo, SNR) allowed classification of 81% voice samples in the same grade as the jury in women and 84% in men. In the prospective study, 80.5% were correctly classified with the same set of objective measurements. Discussion: The relative importance of the different objective parameters in this type of discriminant analysis is dealt with. Special emphasis is placed on Lya.

Sulcus vocalis is described as a groove at the free edge of the vocal fold. Different types have been described: sulcus type I is superficial and may be considered as moreless physiologic. Sulcus type IIa corresponds to a kind of vergeture along the margin of the vocal fold. Its deepness is variable but sulcus vergeture may involve deeper layers of the lamina propria. Sulcus type IIb or pounch may be considered as an open cyst. Sulcus lead to a complex glottic dysfunction with, in the same time, a glottal leakage responsible for the breathy component of the dysphonia and a stiffness of the free edge responsible for the roughness. Diagnosis may be difficult even with the help of stroboscopy and finally is sometimes done only under general anesthesia. Etiology remains controversial and the authors present arguments for each theory, acquired or congenital. Treatment options include phonosurgery and speech therapy but phonosurgery gives results often disappointing and surgical treatment must be indicated prudently and patient must be intensively informed on what he or she can expect from the treatment that is mainly an increase of the loudness of the voice.

Procedures putting healthcare workers in close contact with the airway are particularly at risk of contamination by the SARS-Cov-2 virus, especially when exposed to sputum, coughing, or a tracheostomy. In the current pandemic phase, all patients should be considered as potentially infected. Thus, the level of precaution recommended for the caregivers depends more on the type of procedure than on the patient's proved or suspected COVID-19 status. Procedures that are particularly at high risk of contamination are clinical and flexible endoscopic pharyngolaryngological evaluation, and probably also video fluoroscopic swallowing exams. Voice rehabilitation should not be considered urgent at this time. Therefore, recommendations presented here mainly concern the management of swallowing disorders, which can sometimes be dangerous for the patient, and recent dysphonia. In cases where they are considered possible and useful, teleconsultations should be preferred to face-to-face assessments or rehabilitation sessions. The latter must be maintained only in few selected situations, after team discussions or in accordance with the guidelines provided by health authorities.