The purpose of this study is to evaluate the subjective, objective, and aerodynamic impact of voice rest following injection augmentation and compare the outcomes to patients with no post-procedure voice restrictions.
Glottic insufficiency resulting from vocal fold immobility can have a significant negative impact on health and quality of life and is a major cause of dysphonia, dysphagia, and dyspnea. Vocal fold immobility can be unilateral or bilateral and complete or partial. Most commonly, it is caused by iatrogenic injury to the recurrent laryngeal nerve from thyroidectomy or anterior cervical disc fusion surgeries. Other causes include traumatic, idiopathic, malignant, and neurogenic. Variability exists in approach to surgical management. Degree of spontaneous recovery and thus timing of intervention varies based on severity and permanency of neurological injury. Initially described by Wilhelm Brünings in 1911, injection laryngoplasty, also known as injection augmentation, is a technique to improve glottic closure by injection of material to move the immobile vocal fold closer to midline. This improves voice quality and strain in patients with either unilateral or bilateral vocal fold hypomobility, immobility, atrophy, presbylarynx, vocal fold scar, and soft tissue loss. Improvement in glottic closure also results in better swallowing outcomes. Injection augmentation can be performed under general anesthesia in patients unable to tolerate the procedure while awake. Injection can be performed peroral, through a working channeled flexible laryngoscope, or a percutaneous approach. Percutaneous approaches can be further divided into transthyroid cartilage, transcricothyroid membrane, or transthyrohyoid membrane. All cases are performed under endoscopic guidance to ensure correct needle placement and adequate medialization of affected vocal fold. Congruent with the heterogeneity of injection laryngoplasty materials, approaches, and techniques, there also appears to be no data or expert consensus regarding voice rest following this procedure. This study aims to quantify the benefit of voice rest following vocal fold injection augmentation.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
150
Voice rest restricting patient phonation
No Voice rest
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
RECRUITINGPatient-perceived voice improvement
Voice Handicap Index - 10. Scale range 0-40. Lower score designates lower voice impairment
Time frame: 2 weeks
GRBAS- Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, Strain
Clinician-perceived improvement in voice. Range is 0-15. Lower score indicates lower perceived vocal impairment
Time frame: 2 weeks
Phonation threshold pressure
Objective aerodynamic measure
Time frame: 2 weeks
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.