Shaghauyegh S Azar, Courtney B Shires, Karuna Dewan, Dinesh K Chhetri
{"title":"Total tracheoesophageal puncture failure: A scoping review of patient characteristics and etiologies.","authors":"Shaghauyegh S Azar, Courtney B Shires, Karuna Dewan, Dinesh K Chhetri","doi":"10.1002/hed.27901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Tracheoesophageal prosthesis (TEP) is a common method for post-laryngectomy speech rehabilitation. Despite its common use, some patients ultimately fail TEP rehabilitation. TEP dysfunction negatively affects quality of life due to poor voice quality and need for repeated interventions to restore TEP function. Occasionally, voice rehabilitation with TEP is completely unsuccessful. We performed a scoping review to characterize the main reasons for total TEP failure, in hopes of guiding selection of optimal TEP candidates.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Scoping review using PubMed of all English language articles from 1990 to 2020 addressing causes of TEP failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review followed the population, intervention, comparison, outcome and study (PICOS) guidelines. Total TEP failure was defined as complete loss or abandonment of TEP voice or tract. A comprehensive search strategy using PubMed's MeSH subject headings and keywords was created. Causes and rates of failure were reviewed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 544 peer-reviewed journal articles reviewed for inclusion. Seventy articles met inclusion criteria, resulting in a total of 4928 TEP voice restoration patients for analysis. 15.2% of these patients had total TEP failure. The most common reasons for failure were dissatisfaction with voice (26.3%), leakage (17.9%), inadequate patient motivation (14.7%), comorbidities (14.2%), stoma problems (11.6%), and abandonment of TEP after dislodgement (10.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Common reasons for TEP failure included voice dissatisfaction, leakage, lack of patient motivation, patient comorbidities, and stoma problems. These factors should be considered when selecting candidates for TEP voice restoration.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.27901","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Tracheoesophageal prosthesis (TEP) is a common method for post-laryngectomy speech rehabilitation. Despite its common use, some patients ultimately fail TEP rehabilitation. TEP dysfunction negatively affects quality of life due to poor voice quality and need for repeated interventions to restore TEP function. Occasionally, voice rehabilitation with TEP is completely unsuccessful. We performed a scoping review to characterize the main reasons for total TEP failure, in hopes of guiding selection of optimal TEP candidates.
Study design: Scoping review using PubMed of all English language articles from 1990 to 2020 addressing causes of TEP failure.
Methods: This scoping review followed the population, intervention, comparison, outcome and study (PICOS) guidelines. Total TEP failure was defined as complete loss or abandonment of TEP voice or tract. A comprehensive search strategy using PubMed's MeSH subject headings and keywords was created. Causes and rates of failure were reviewed.
Results: Among 544 peer-reviewed journal articles reviewed for inclusion. Seventy articles met inclusion criteria, resulting in a total of 4928 TEP voice restoration patients for analysis. 15.2% of these patients had total TEP failure. The most common reasons for failure were dissatisfaction with voice (26.3%), leakage (17.9%), inadequate patient motivation (14.7%), comorbidities (14.2%), stoma problems (11.6%), and abandonment of TEP after dislodgement (10.6%).
Conclusion: Common reasons for TEP failure included voice dissatisfaction, leakage, lack of patient motivation, patient comorbidities, and stoma problems. These factors should be considered when selecting candidates for TEP voice restoration.
目的:气管食管假体(TEP)是喉切除术后语言康复的常用方法。尽管这种方法很常用,但一些患者最终还是无法通过 TEP 进行康复治疗。由于嗓音质量差,且需要反复干预以恢复 TEP 功能,TEP 功能障碍对生活质量造成了负面影响。有时,使用 TEP 进行嗓音康复完全不成功。我们对 TEP 完全失败的主要原因进行了范围界定,希望能为选择最佳 TEP 候选者提供指导:研究设计:使用 PubMed 对 1990 年至 2020 年间所有涉及 TEP 失败原因的英文文章进行范围界定:该范围界定审查遵循人群、干预、比较、结果和研究(PICOS)指南。TEP完全失败的定义是TEP声音或声道完全丧失或放弃。利用 PubMed 的 MeSH 主题词和关键词制定了全面的搜索策略。结果:在 544 篇同行评审期刊论文中,有 70 篇符合纳入标准。有 70 篇文章符合纳入标准,因此共有 4928 名 TEP 语音恢复患者可供分析。其中 15.2% 的患者 TEP 完全失败。最常见的失败原因是对嗓音不满意(26.3%)、渗漏(17.9%)、患者动力不足(14.7%)、合并症(14.2%)、造口问题(11.6%)以及脱落后放弃 TEP(10.6%):TEP失败的常见原因包括嗓音不满意、渗漏、患者缺乏动力、患者合并症和造口问题。在选择 TEP 恢复嗓音的候选者时应考虑这些因素。