Comparing videofluoroscopy and endoscopy to assess swallowing in bottle-fed young infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

Armstrong, Erika S.; Reynolds, Jenny; Carroll, Sandra; Sturdivant, Chrysty; Suterwala, Mustafa S.

doi:10.1038/s41372-019-0438-2

Cited by 19 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study showed a 73% agreement between the two procedures for penetration on linked swallows. Armstrong et al ( 4 ) also showed that FEES detected more instances of penetration, which was consistent with our results in this study. The analysis of total swallows captured on VFSS and FEES showed similar results to the linked swallows, implying that the linked swallows accurately represented the whole sample of swallows captured.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Literature shows that penetration is linked to tracheal aspiration ( 22 ). Our pilot data showed that FEES detected more penetration than VFSS, which corroborates with available evidence reported in both the pediatric ( 4 , 23 – 25 ) and adult literature ( 20 , 26 , 27 ). This supports the notion that FEES is more sensitive than VFSS in detecting penetration.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…A recent study by Armstrong et al ( 4 ) compared nonsimultaneous VFSS and FEES (performed at different time points) in preterm infants showing a high agreement between VFSS and FEES for detecting aspiration (92%) and moderate agreement for penetration (56%). Our study showed a 73% agreement between the two procedures for penetration on linked swallows.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results of combined VFSS and FEES were compared to each test alone for penetration and aspiration. For the simultaneous VFSS-FEES measure, similar to Giraldo-Cadavid et al (14) and Armstrong et al (4) we used a composite measure for diagnosing penetration or aspiration if they were present on either VFSS "OR" FEES. If penetration or aspiration was found on either procedure, it was considered a "positive" finding, while a "negative" finding would require both tests to be negative.…”

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) is currently the most widely used assessment tool to diagnose dysphagia in preterm infants (1,2). In recent years, Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) has also become a feasible assessment tool in preterm infants (3)(4)(5)(6). Although both tests have proven to be valuable and feasible, each test has its benefits and limitations in regard to visualization and assessment of swallowing physiology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Simultaneous Videofluoroscopy and Endoscopy for Dysphagia Evaluation in Preterm Infants—A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Simultaneous Videofluoroscopy and Endoscopy for Dysphagia Evaluation in Preterm Infants—A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Videofluoroscopic swallow study and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallow, which is superior?

Lawlor

Choi

2023

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk of Aspiration Increased by Post‐swallow Residue in Infant Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES)

Chang,

Okland,

Johnson

et al. 2023

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo assess the risk of aspiration associated with post‐swallow residue subsites in Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) in bottle‐fed infants <1 year of age.MethodsThis is a retrospective matched‐pairs cohort study at an academic tertiary children's hospital. FEES and Videofluoroscopic Swallowing Study (VFSS) trials performed within the same infant <5 days apart were paired by matching bolus consistency and bottle flow rate. Positive aspiration was defined by the “or rule” in which aspiration is positive when either FEES or VFSS within a matched pair is positive.ResultsEighty‐seven FEES‐VFSS matched pairs from 29 patients (16 males; mean [SD] age, 2.9 [2.8] months) were included. The rate of positive aspiration, as defined by the “or rule”, was 59% (51/87). In FEES, post‐swallow pyriform sinus residue was present in 16% (14/87) and anterior commissure residue 27% (31/87). Risk of positive aspiration was increased by pyriform sinus residue (odds ratio [OR] 5.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9–19.3, p < 0.01) and anterior commissure residue in FEES (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1–6.1, p = 0.03). In the neonate subgroup, <1 month of age, multivariate‐adjusted analysis showed that anterior commissure residue had better diagnostic accuracy for aspiration than in older infants (overall 70% vs. 42%, p < 0.01; sensitivity 60% vs. 10%, p < 0.01), whereas pyriform sinus residue had worse accuracy (overall 41% vs. 70%, p = 0.02; sensitivity 13% vs. 43%, p = 0.02).ConclusionThis study demonstrates that pyriform sinus and anterior commissure residue during infant FEES were associated with fivefold and twofold increased risk of aspiration, respectively.Level of Evidence3. Using a retrospective matched‐pairs cohort, this study assesses the diagnostic accuracy of post‐swallow residue in FEES for predicting aspiration. Laryngoscope, 2023

show abstract

Comparing videofluoroscopy and endoscopy to assess swallowing in bottle-fed young infants in the neonatal intensive care unit

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Simultaneous Videofluoroscopy and Endoscopy for Dysphagia Evaluation in Preterm Infants—A Pilot Study

Simultaneous Videofluoroscopy and Endoscopy for Dysphagia Evaluation in Preterm Infants—A Pilot Study

Videofluoroscopic swallow study and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallow, which is superior?

Risk of Aspiration Increased by Post‐swallow Residue in Infant Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About