Acta oto-laryngologica · 2013
Phonological outcome of laryngeal framework surgery by different anesthesia protocols: a single-surgeon experience.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kanazawa Takeharu, Watanabe Yusuke, Komazawa Daigo, Indo Kanako, Misawa Kiyoshi, Nagatomo Takafumi, Shimada Mari, Iino Yukiko, Ichimura Keiichi
Аннотация
CONCLUSION: Similar to combined arytenoid adduction and medialization laryngoplasty (i.e. combined surgery) under local anesthesia, general anesthesia by intubation or by the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) method significantly improves phonological outcome. Thus, laryngeal framework surgery under general anesthesia is a promising surgical approach for selected patients with unilateral vocal cord paralysis (UVCP).
OBJECTIVE: The advantages of laryngeal framework surgery under local anesthesia have been described, but no studies exist concerning the difference in phonological outcome of laryngeal framework surgery performed under general anesthesia. To add new information, we retrospectively investigated the phonological outcome of the combined surgery performed under three different anesthesia protocols.
METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients with severe UVCP underwent the combined surgery under three anesthesia protocols performed by a single surgeon: (1) under general anesthesia by intubation, (2) under general anesthesia using LMA, and (3) under local anesthesia.
RESULTS: Under all anesthesia protocols, the vocal cords of most patients could be positioned such that the best vocal outcome could be expected. Statistical analyses demonstrated improved maximum phonation time and mean airflow rate, and grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, and strain (GRBAS) scale in all patients, regardless of their anesthesia protocol. Furthermore, of the three protocols, local anesthesia had the shortest operation time.
OBJECTIVE: The advantages of laryngeal framework surgery under local anesthesia have been described, but no studies exist concerning the difference in phonological outcome of laryngeal framework surgery performed under general anesthesia. To add new information, we retrospectively investigated the phonological outcome of the combined surgery performed under three different anesthesia protocols.
METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients with severe UVCP underwent the combined surgery under three anesthesia protocols performed by a single surgeon: (1) under general anesthesia by intubation, (2) under general anesthesia using LMA, and (3) under local anesthesia.
RESULTS: Under all anesthesia protocols, the vocal cords of most patients could be positioned such that the best vocal outcome could be expected. Statistical analyses demonstrated improved maximum phonation time and mean airflow rate, and grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, and strain (GRBAS) scale in all patients, regardless of their anesthesia protocol. Furthermore, of the three protocols, local anesthesia had the shortest operation time.