Device Life of Two Generations of Provox Voice Prostheses

Thylur, David S.; Villegas, Brenda Capobres; Fisher, Laurel M.; Sinha, Uttam K.; Kokot, Niels

doi:10.1177/0003489415624701

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specific tissues pertaining to a voice prosthesis include details pertaining to the length of voice prosthesis, expense, diameter, type of retention collar, method of insertion, need for follow-up care, and the patient's ability to care for the prosthesis. For the past several decades, a voice prosthetic device has become the gold standard of voice rehabilitation for a majority of the laryngectomy patients, with the exception of the odd patient who has acquired good esophageal speech or for whom an external device is the only practical method of voice production [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is also objectively reflected as the better voice parameters, i.e., fundamental frequency, shimmer, jitter, words per minute, and better Not received maximum phonation time for the lung-powered speech. Voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy has in fact been revolutionized by use of TEP with voice prosthesis; many studies over the years have in fact reported its superiority to esophageal speech/electrolarynx speech [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A major limitation of voice prosthesis is its finite life span necessitating replacements [10][11][12]. The reasons for device/ voice failure can be attributed either due to TE puncture or prosthesis-related complications/problems or due to poor understanding or motivation of the patient.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During the performance of a total laryngectomy, the sound source (larynx) is removed and the power source (lungs) is disconnected from the sound modifiers (pharyngoesophageal segment). Over the years tracheoesophageal voice puncture (TEP) coupled with the use of voice prosthesis has become the gold standard for speech rehabilitation in patients who have received total laryngectomy [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Although prosthetic voice rehabilitation is commonly practiced in major centers worldwide, there is sparse published Indian data in literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Factors Affecting the Longevity of Voice Prosthesis Following Total Laryngectomy with a Review of Literature

Khwajamohiuddin

2017

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tracheoesophageal voice puncture (TEP) coupled with the use of voice prosthesis has been considered as the gold standard for speech rehabilitation in patients of advanced laryngeal/hypopharyngeal carcinomas, who have undergone a total laryngectomy with or without partial pharyngectomy. Although prosthetic voice rehabilitation is commonly practiced worldwide including India, there is a paucity of published Indian data, more so in the current era of organ conservation. This study included 60 laryngectomized patients with a prosthetic voice rehabilitation at a tertiary cancer center in South India between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2013. Among the 60 patients, the primary site of cancer was the larynx in 43 patients and hypopharynx in the remaining 17. All patients had undergone a primary TEP insertion, 55 in the upfront setting and five in the salvage (post-radiation/chemo-radiation) setting. The ability to retain a successful trachea-esophageal speech on follow-up (median 15.5 months) in our series was around 82%. The mean device life of voice prosthesis in our patient cohort was 16 months. There was surprisingly no significant difference in the prosthesis device life on correlation with age, co-morbidities, habitat, literacy status, pre-operative tracheostomy, setting of surgery, and the extent of surgery. Our series has successfully demonstrated the safety and feasibility of using primary TEP coupled with the use of voice prosthesis for voice rehabilitation in properly selected and motivated patients of advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinomas across all clinical settings. A mean device life of 16 months makes prosthetic voice rehabilitation, an attractive as well as a financially viable option for patients in a resource constrained setting.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analysis of Factors Affecting the Longevity of Voice Prosthesis Following Total Laryngectomy with a Review of Literature

Khwajamohiuddin

2017

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the results mirror clinical experience, such as the reported device lifetimes of specialty prostheses or the similar device lifetimes of the Provox 2 and its successor the Provox Vega prosteses. 33 Two other voice prosthesis, such as the Blom Singer classic prosthesis and the Newvox prosthesis could not be included in the study: the white color of the valve flap of the Blom Singer classic prostheses provided insufficient color contrast to perform simple optical biofilm quantification; and the Newvox prosthesis made of polyurethane could not be provided by the manufacturer in sufficient numbers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro biofilm growth on modern voice prostheses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Patterns of alaryngeal voice adoption and predictive factors of vocal rehabilitation failure following total laryngectomy

Landry,

Christopoulos,

Guertin

et al. 2023

Head & Neck

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveWe aimed to determine patterns of alaryngeal voice acquisition and predictive factors of vocal rehabilitation (VR) failure following total laryngectomy (TL) at a large Canadian tertiary care center.MethodsAll consecutive patients having undergone a TL between January 1st, 2011 and December 31st, 2019, at the Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal were included.ResultsOne hundred and ninety‐seven laryngectomized patients were identified. Successful VR was achieved in 86 (59.0%) patients, while 59 (41.0%) failed to use a method of alaryngeal voice as their principal means of communication at 1 year postoperatively. The use of tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) was associated with higher VR success rates (70.6%) when compared with the artificial larynx (48.6%), and esophageal voice (18.8%). The only independent predictor of VR failure on multivariate analysis at all time points was a low socioeconomic status.ConclusionFailure to adopt an alaryngeal voice following TL is highly prevalent, despite comprehensive and free speech language pathologist services being offered at our center. A low resort to TEP at our institution and a poor acceptability and accessibility of alternative VR methods may contribute to this trend. The challenges of VR may be further exacerbated by the barriers linked to a lower socioeconomic status, which in turn may contribute to reduced candidacy for TEP.

show abstract

Device Life of Two Generations of Provox Voice Prostheses

Abstract: Device longevity was greater for Provox 2 over Provox Vega. These results will facilitate the design of prospective studies to assess reasons for variations in device life between patients and device types.

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Analysis of Factors Affecting the Longevity of Voice Prosthesis Following Total Laryngectomy with a Review of Literature

Analysis of Factors Affecting the Longevity of Voice Prosthesis Following Total Laryngectomy with a Review of Literature

In vitro biofilm growth on modern voice prostheses

Patterns of alaryngeal voice adoption and predictive factors of vocal rehabilitation failure following total laryngectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About