2016
DOI: 10.1097/moo.0000000000000308
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Laryngeal framework surgery: current strategies

Abstract: Articles published from 2015 to mid-2016 show that further improvements in LFS have been made, both surgically-technically and in respect of patient selection. There is still a debate about the combination of medialization laryngoplasty and arytenoid adduction in patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis or paresis (UVFP). Although augmentation laryngoplasties are significantly increasing in number, it seems that LFS remains an important procedure within phonosurgery.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Various treatment options have been proposed to improve hoarseness due to UVFP. Vocal fold injection therapy and laryngeal framework surgery, such as medialization laryngoplasty and arytenoid adduction, are usually performed. However, these procedures provide only static adjustment to the larynx, and hoarseness often persists after treatment because of progressive atrophy of the denervated thyroarytenoid (TA) muscle, which may result in limited functional improvement.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various treatment options have been proposed to improve hoarseness due to UVFP. Vocal fold injection therapy and laryngeal framework surgery, such as medialization laryngoplasty and arytenoid adduction, are usually performed. However, these procedures provide only static adjustment to the larynx, and hoarseness often persists after treatment because of progressive atrophy of the denervated thyroarytenoid (TA) muscle, which may result in limited functional improvement.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Arytenoid adduction is rarely performed in isolation, and debate exists regarding indications for addition of AA to ML. 20,26,[30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Furthermore, significant controversy remains as to whether ML+AA translates to clinically significant voice outcomes 28,30,32,33 and whether the potential increase in risk of postoperative complications, such as length of hospital stay, transient vocal fold edema, wound complications, and need for tracheostomy, 28,[37][38][39] justifies its use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some institutions will identify the need for AA preoperatively based on a large posterior glottic gap and arytenoid malrotation, whereas other institutions, including the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Voice and Swallowing center, intraoperatively decide to proceed with additional AA when voice results following ML are inadequate . In fact, there currently exists debate regarding whether addition of AA to ML is truly necessary …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 In fact, there currently exists debate regarding whether addition of AA to ML is truly necessary. 3,4,6,7 The main area of contention is whether ML-AA truly improves clinical outcomes; one study found greater improvement in acoustic and aerodynamic measures with ML-AA compared to ML or injection laryngoplasty, 4 but various articles subjectively evaluating posterior glottic gap have had contradictory findings. 5,8 However, there also is concern that the addition of AA increases complication rates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%