International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2023
Timeline to dysphagia resolution after endoscopic intervention of an interarytenoid defect based on Video Fluoroscopic Swallow Study dysphagia severity.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Wineski R E, Beltran-Ale G, Simpson R, Evarts M, Stein J S, Rosen P, Rogers J A, Leonard M V, Dimmitt R, Soong A, Kassel R, Harris W T, Wiatrak B, Smith N J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We previously reported that endoscopic repair of a Type 1 Laryngeal Cleft (LC1) or Deep Interarytenoid Groove (DIG) improves swallowing function postoperatively. However, caregivers often ask about the timeline to resolution of the need for thickening. This study re-examines this cohort to answer this important caregiver-centered question.
METHODS: We reassessed a 3-year retrospective, single-center dataset of children with dysphagia found to have a LC-1 or DIG on endoscopic exam. The primary outcome was rate of complete resolution of dysphagia at 2, 6, and 12 months after endoscopic intervention. A sub-group analysis was made based on severity of dysphagia prior to intervention and by type of endoscopic repair.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with mean age 1.35 years that had a LC-1 or DIG met criteria for inclusion. Rate of complete dysphagia resolution increased over time. Those with mild dysphagia (flow-reducing nipple and/or IDDSI consistency 1 or 2) had brisker resolution than those with moderate dysphagia (IDDSI consistency 3 or 4) at 2 months (67% vs 5%, p < 0.01) and at 6 months (80% vs 18%, p < 0.01) after endoscopic repair. There was no difference in dysphagia resolution between patients grouped by type of endoscopic repair.
CONCLUSION: Addressing an interarytenoid defect in patients will not result in immediate, complete dysphagia resolution in most patients. However, patients that only require a flow-reducing nipple and/or thickening to an IDDSI consistency 1 or 2 have brisker resolution of the need for thickening than those that require an IDSSI consistency 3 or 4 prior to intervention. These results inform pre-operative discussions of the timeline to resolution based upon severity of dysphagia and help manage caregiver expectations.
METHODS: We reassessed a 3-year retrospective, single-center dataset of children with dysphagia found to have a LC-1 or DIG on endoscopic exam. The primary outcome was rate of complete resolution of dysphagia at 2, 6, and 12 months after endoscopic intervention. A sub-group analysis was made based on severity of dysphagia prior to intervention and by type of endoscopic repair.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with mean age 1.35 years that had a LC-1 or DIG met criteria for inclusion. Rate of complete dysphagia resolution increased over time. Those with mild dysphagia (flow-reducing nipple and/or IDDSI consistency 1 or 2) had brisker resolution than those with moderate dysphagia (IDDSI consistency 3 or 4) at 2 months (67% vs 5%, p < 0.01) and at 6 months (80% vs 18%, p < 0.01) after endoscopic repair. There was no difference in dysphagia resolution between patients grouped by type of endoscopic repair.
CONCLUSION: Addressing an interarytenoid defect in patients will not result in immediate, complete dysphagia resolution in most patients. However, patients that only require a flow-reducing nipple and/or thickening to an IDDSI consistency 1 or 2 have brisker resolution of the need for thickening than those that require an IDSSI consistency 3 or 4 prior to intervention. These results inform pre-operative discussions of the timeline to resolution based upon severity of dysphagia and help manage caregiver expectations.