Drs. Singer and Blom pioneered the development of a valved voice prosthesis and controlled fistula between the tracheal and esophagcal wall to generate fluent esophageal speech in laryngectomy patients. Since then numerous voice prostheses with different performance capacities have entered the marketplace. In spite of optimal choices and fitting of devices, there remains a population of patients refractory to this type of rehabilitation. It is our experience that a number of patients ultimately benefit from middle and inferior constrictor myotomy with marked improvement in their speech. Patient selection, evaluation, and operative techniques are discussed. Five patients who were unable to speak even after introduction of various commercially available devices showed marked improvement after middle and inferior constrictor surgical myotomy. Minimal complications were encountered even in irradiated patients. These patients were preoperatively injected with Xylocaine to produce a partial blockade. Their speech improved dramatically for the duration of Xylocaine blockade. Esophageal video fluoroscopy of attempted speech with the voice prosthesis in place confirmed constrictor spasm that opposed air flow to the oropharynx. Inferior and middle constrictor myotomy appears to be very beneficial in rehabilitation of failed alaryngeal speakers who demonstrate pharyngeal constrictor spasm.

No abstract

The inhalation of ambient SARS-CoV-2-containing bioaerosols leads to infection and pandemic airborne transmission in susceptible populations. Filter-based respirators effectively reduce exposure but complicate normal respiration through breathing zone pressure differentials; therefore, they are impractical for long-term use. Objectives: We tested the comparative effectiveness of a prototyped miniaturized electrostatic precipitator (mEP) on a filter-based respirator (N95) via the removal of viral bioaerosols from a simulated, inspired air stream. Methods: Each respirator was tested within a 16 L environmental chamber housed within a Class III biological safety cabinet within biosafety level 3 containment. SARS-CoV-2-containing bioaerosols were generated in the chamber, drawn by a vacuum through each respirator, and physical particle removal and viral genomic RNA were measured distal to the breathing zone of each device. Measurements and Main Results: The mEP respirator removed particles (96.5 ± 0.4%), approximating efficiencies of the N95 (96.9 ± 0.6%). The mEP respirator similarly decreased SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA (99.792%) when compared to N95 removal (99.942%), as a function of particle removal from the airstream distal to the breathing zone of each respirator. Conclusions: The mEP respirator approximated the performance of a filter-based N95 respirator for particle removal and viral RNA as a constituent of the SARS-CoV-2 bioaerosols generated for this evaluation. In practice, the mEP respirator could provide equivalent protection from ambient infectious bioaerosols as the N95 respirator without undue pressure drop to the wearer, thereby facilitating its long-term use in an unobstructed breathing configuration.

No abstract