Alterations in hyolaryngeal elevation after esophageal anastomosis: A possible mechanism for airway aspiration.

AIM: A prospective study was performed to evaluate anatomical alterations and hyolaryngeal elevation (HE) by videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) in patients with esophageal atresia-tracheoesophageal fistula (EA-TEF).

METHODS

Patients operated for EA-TEF were evaluated for age, sex, type of atresia and time to esophageal anastomosis. All patients were evaluated by videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS). Penetration-Aspiration scale (PAS≥7 is considered as aspiration), distance between upper esophageal sphincter and 2nd cervical vertebrae (UES-C2) and hyolaryngeal elevation (HE) were evaluated by the same deglutitionist who was blind to the study. The results of EA-TEF patients were compared with healthy children.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients with EA-TEF and 10 healthy controls were included. The median age was 16months (12-36m) in EA-TEF and 18months (13-51m) in controls. Male-to-female ratio was 5:4 and 4:1 respectively. 12 of cases were isolated-EA, 1 of them was EA-proximal TEF and 5 of the cases were EA-distal TEF. Half of the cases had primary EAN and others underwent delayed esophageal repair. Early oral feeding was also started in 9 patients (50%) whereas others had delayed oral feeding. VFSS showed aspiration in 27.7 (n=5) of cases (PAS≥7) in EA group. The median distance between UES-C2 was 3.04cm (min: 2.17-max: 3.94) in EA and 4.17cm (min: 3.45-max: 6.24cm) in controls. Median distance for HE was 0.37cm (min: 0.18-max: 1.1cm) in EA and 1.15 (min: 0.61-max: 1.06cm) in controls. The distance between UES-C2 was significantly lower than controls (p<0.05) and HE was decreased in EA-TEF without any statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Children with EA-TEF had shortened distance between airway and upper esophagus. HE may be inefficient to protect airway during deglutition. Anatomical alterations after EAN suggest that airway problems may be related with decreased HE in children with EATEF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II (Development of diagnostic criteria in a consecutive series of patients and a universally applied "gold standard").