Background The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, risk factors, and spontaneous recovery rate of vocal fold paresis (VFP) with routine laryngoscopy before and after thyroid surgery. Methods All consecutive patients undergoing primary or redo thyroid surgery between years 2011-2016 were prospectively registered in an electronic database, and scheduled for pre-and postoperative laryngoscopic vocal fold inspection by otolaryngologists independently of the surgical team. Results A total of 920 thyroid operations with 1296 nerves at risk were performed in 866 patients. Pre-and postoperative laryngoscopy was done in 95% and 98%, respectively. Preoperative VFP was detected in 24 (2.8%) patients. New postoperative VFP was found in 53 of 920 operations (5.8%) and in 55 of 1296 nerves at risk (4.2%). After 12 months, 14 had recovered full vocal fold function and eight had near-complete recovery. VFP was permanent after 29 operations (3.2%); two patients were lost to follow-up with uncertain outcome. Of the 1296 nerves at risk, injury was permanent in 30 (2.3%). In multivariate analysis, patients operated for recurrent goiter had nearly nine times higher risk of new VFP (23% rate), whereas patients with malignant histology had three times higher risk of postoperative VFP (up to 22% rate). Conclusion VFP continues to be a serious complication of thyroid surgery, especially in operations for redo goiter and thyroid malignancy. The incidence of VFP may be underestimated unless laryngoscopic examinations are performed routinely.
Background and Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of two items in vocal fold paresis and paralysis screening after thyroid and parathyroid surgery: patient self-assessment of voice using the Voice Handicap Index and computer-based acoustic voice analysis using the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective study of 181 patients who underwent thyroid or parathyroid surgery over a 1-year study period (2017). Preoperatively, all patients underwent laryngoscopic vocal fold inspection and acoustic voice analysis, and they completed the Voice Handicap Index questionnaire. Postoperatively, all patients underwent laryngoscopy prior to hospital discharge; 2 weeks after the surgery, they completed the Voice Handicap Index questionnaire a second time. Two weeks postoperatively, patients with vocal fold paresis or paralysis and 20 randomly selected controls without vocal fold paresis or paralysis underwent a follow-up acoustic voice analysis. Results: Fourteen patients had a new postoperative vocal fold paresis or paralysis. Postoperatively, the total Voice Handicap Index score was significantly higher (p = 0.040) and the change between preoperative and postoperative scores was greater (p = 0.028) in vocal fold paresis or paralysis patients. A total postoperative Voice Handicap Index score > 30 had 55% sensitivity, and 90% specificity, for vocal fold paresis or paralysis. In the postoperative Multi-Dimensional Voice Program analysis, vocal fold paresis or paralysis patients had significantly more jitter (p = 0.044). Postoperative jitter > 1.33 corresponded to 55% sensitivity, and 95% specificity, for vocal fold paresis or paralysis. Conclusion: In identifying postoperative vocal fold paresis or paralysis, patient self-assessment and jitter in acoustic voice analysis have high specificity but poor sensitivity. Without routine laryngoscopy, approximately half of the patients with postoperative vocal fold paresis or paralysis could be overlooked. However, if the patient has no complaints of voice disturbance 2 weeks after thyroid or parathyroid surgery, the likelihood of vocal fold paresis or paralysis is low.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.