Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2021
Voice-Related Quality of Life After Total Laryngectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание 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.
Maniaci Antonino, Lechien Jerome Rene, Caruso Sebastiano, Nocera Francesco, Ferlito Salvatore, Iannella Giannicola, Grillo Caterina Maria, Magliulo Giuseppe, Pace Annalisa, Vicini Claudio, La Mantia Ignazio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To compare voice rehabilitation-related quality of life among patients surgically treated for total laryngectomy and rehabilitated with esophageal (EV) and tracheoesophageal (TEV) voice.
METHODS: A systematic literature review of articles from the past 20 years was conducted, and only full-text English articles comparing VTE and EV results in laryngectomized patients were included.
RESULTS: We provided 15 articles for a total of 1085 laryngectomized patients undergoing voice rehabilitation, of which 869 (80.1%) were treated with voice prosthesis while 216 (19.9%) to esophageal speech. Pooled VHI outcomes showed a significantly better score for the TEV group than EV one (31.93±12.11 versus 35.39±20.6; P = 0.003), but no significant difference was recorded at VrQoL (8.27±5.98 versus 9.27±2.02; P = 0.19).
CONCLUSION: TEV and EV are both effective procedures in voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Although TEV allows for significantly better speech performance, it does not necessarily correlate with a high VrQoL.
METHODS: A systematic literature review of articles from the past 20 years was conducted, and only full-text English articles comparing VTE and EV results in laryngectomized patients were included.
RESULTS: We provided 15 articles for a total of 1085 laryngectomized patients undergoing voice rehabilitation, of which 869 (80.1%) were treated with voice prosthesis while 216 (19.9%) to esophageal speech. Pooled VHI outcomes showed a significantly better score for the TEV group than EV one (31.93±12.11 versus 35.39±20.6; P = 0.003), but no significant difference was recorded at VrQoL (8.27±5.98 versus 9.27±2.02; P = 0.19).
CONCLUSION: TEV and EV are both effective procedures in voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Although TEV allows for significantly better speech performance, it does not necessarily correlate with a high VrQoL.