MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций
Медицинская библиотека · Ear, nose, & throat journal · 2006

Outcomes of primary and secondary tracheoesophageal puncture: a 16-year retrospective analysis.

Cheng Elaine, Ho Margie, Ganz Cindy, Shaha Ashok, Boyle Jay O, Singh Bhuvanesh, Wong Richard J, Patel Snehal, Shah Jatin, Branski Ryan C, Kraus Dennis H

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

The current study retrospectively reviewed the cases of 68 patients who had undergone total laryngectomy and tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) over a 16-year period. Fifty-one patients underwent primary TEP and 17 underwent secondary TEP. Nearly 80% of patients who received TEP at the time of laryngectomy achieved excellent voice quality perceptually. In contrast, only 50% of secondary TEP patients achieved excellent voice ratings. This difference was statistically robust (p = 0.03). Although both surgical and prosthesis-related complications occurred more frequently following primary TEP, statistically significant differences were not achieved. Neither pre- nor postoperative radiotherapy had any effect on voice restoration or complication rates. Based on these data, primary TEP may be preferable for several reasons, including a greater likelihood of successful voice restoration, a shorter duration of postoperative aphonia, and the elimination of the need for a second operation and interim tube feedings.

Для цитирования: Cheng Elaine, Ho Margie, Ganz Cindy, Shaha Ashok, Boyle Jay O, Singh Bhuvanesh, Wong Richard J, Patel Snehal, Shah Jatin, Branski Ryan C, Kraus Dennis H. Outcomes of primary and secondary tracheoesophageal puncture: a 16-year retrospective analysis.. Ear, nose, & throat journal. 2006.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.