Management of Posterior Glottic Stenosis: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY Journal of Voice Pub Date : 2024-12-20 DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2024.12.005
Noémie Nemry, Emilie A C Dronkers, Marc J Remacle, Stéphane Hans, Jérôme R Lechien
{"title":"Management of Posterior Glottic Stenosis: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Noémie Nemry, Emilie A C Dronkers, Marc J Remacle, Stéphane Hans, Jérôme R Lechien","doi":"10.1016/j.jvoice.2024.12.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the current literature about surgical management and postoperative outcomes of posterior glottic stenosis (PGS).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>PubMED, Scopus, and Cochrane Library.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three investigators conducted a comprehensive review of the literature related to the epidemiology, etiologies, and management of adult patients with PGS through the PRISMA statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight retrospective studies met our inclusion criteria, accounting for 502 patients. Prolonged intubation (51.8%) was the most prevalent etiology. PGS required immediate tracheotomy in 57.6% of the cases. The mean postsurgery decannulation mean rate was 79.6%, ranging from 61.5% to 100% regarding procedures. There was a myriad of procedures used, the most common including postcricoid mucosa advancement flap, arytenoidectomy, and synechia incision. Voice, swallowing, and airway outcomes significantly improved in most studies following surgery. There was a substantial heterogeneity between studies in the PGS diagnosis, the procedure definition and technical features, and the postoperative outcomes. A few studies used objective airway and voice quality measurements to investigate the procedure effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The management of PGS is associated with satisfactory decannulation rates and subjective improvements in voice and swallowing across various surgical procedures. However, this review highlights significant limitations, including the lack of controlled studies comparing these techniques and the overall low evidence level of existing research. Future consensus guidelines are needed for defining surgical procedures and determining the primary postoperative outcomes to evaluate in PGS.</p>","PeriodicalId":49954,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Voice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Voice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2024.12.005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To review the current literature about surgical management and postoperative outcomes of posterior glottic stenosis (PGS).

Data sources: PubMED, Scopus, and Cochrane Library.

Methods: Three investigators conducted a comprehensive review of the literature related to the epidemiology, etiologies, and management of adult patients with PGS through the PRISMA statements.

Results: Twenty-eight retrospective studies met our inclusion criteria, accounting for 502 patients. Prolonged intubation (51.8%) was the most prevalent etiology. PGS required immediate tracheotomy in 57.6% of the cases. The mean postsurgery decannulation mean rate was 79.6%, ranging from 61.5% to 100% regarding procedures. There was a myriad of procedures used, the most common including postcricoid mucosa advancement flap, arytenoidectomy, and synechia incision. Voice, swallowing, and airway outcomes significantly improved in most studies following surgery. There was a substantial heterogeneity between studies in the PGS diagnosis, the procedure definition and technical features, and the postoperative outcomes. A few studies used objective airway and voice quality measurements to investigate the procedure effectiveness.

Conclusion: The management of PGS is associated with satisfactory decannulation rates and subjective improvements in voice and swallowing across various surgical procedures. However, this review highlights significant limitations, including the lack of controlled studies comparing these techniques and the overall low evidence level of existing research. Future consensus guidelines are needed for defining surgical procedures and determining the primary postoperative outcomes to evaluate in PGS.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Voice
Journal of Voice 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.60%
发文量
395
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Voice is widely regarded as the world''s premiere journal for voice medicine and research. This peer-reviewed publication is listed in Index Medicus and is indexed by the Institute for Scientific Information. The journal contains articles written by experts throughout the world on all topics in voice sciences, voice medicine and surgery, and speech-language pathologists'' management of voice-related problems. The journal includes clinical articles, clinical research, and laboratory research. Members of the Foundation receive the journal as a benefit of membership.
期刊最新文献
Management of Posterior Glottic Stenosis: A Systematic Review. Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Persian Version of the Children's Voice Handicap Index-10 for Parents. Mapping Voice Assessment Procedures and Results in Individuals with Sleep-Related Breathing Disorder: A Scoping Review. Presbyphonia: A Scoping Review for a Comprehensive Assessment of Aging Voice. The Yucatan Minipig: A Reliable Model for Studying Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1