Aerodynamic and acoustic assessment in children following airway reconstruction: An assessment of feasibility

Brehm, Susan Baker; Weinrich, Barbara; Zieser, Meghan; Kelchner, Lisa; Middendorf, Janet; Elluru, Ravi; Alarcón, Alessandro de

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2009.04.001

Cited by 18 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that in many patients the sound source was predominantly from alternative laryngeal structures rather than the true vocal folds 5. We further examined the aerodynamic and acoustic features of voice in these patients,6 classifying the acoustic signals according to periodicity as described by Titze (ie, type 1, type 2, or type 3) 7. Type 1 signals are periodic or nearly periodic; type 2 are signals with subharmonic frequencies that approach the fundamental frequency; and type 3 are aperiodic signals.…”

Section: Voice Research At Cincinnati Children'smentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice outcomes after pediatric airway reconstruction

Alarcón

2012

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Voice Research At Cincinnati Children'smentioning

confidence: 99%

Voice outcomes after pediatric airway reconstruction

Alarcón

2012

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Children with airway stenosis who have undergone PCTR can have additional developmental and co-morbid factors that may affect their ability to complete acoustic and aerodynamic protocols. These children when compared to normal healthy children demonstrate reduced co-operation skills during voice assessment [9]. Other limiting factors for a proper assessment of voice include small patient population, inconsistent inter-subject disease characteristics and unavailability of patients for postoperative analysis due to the long distance they come from.…”

Section: Postsurgical Voice Evaluation In Children: Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term voice outcome following partial cricotracheal resection in children for severe subglottic stenosis

George

Monnier

2010

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many of these children and young adults use an alternative compensatory laryngeal structure as the primary sound source for voicing (e.g., supraglottal sources such as the false vocal folds, aryepiglottic folds, arytenoids, and epiglottic petiole) . These vibratory sources frequently produce acoustic signals that are aperiodic or quasiperiodic and are characterized as type 2 or type 3 signals . Given that these sources can be difficult to characterize using standard stroboscopic techniques, high‐speed videoendoscopy (HSV) has been used to improve the characterization of these sources …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic posterior cricoid reduction: A surgical method to improve posterior glottic diastasis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis Describe the preoperative evaluation of patients with glottic diastasis who are candidates for endoscopic posterior cricoid reduction (EPCR) and their perioperative and postoperative surgical and voice outcomes, and validate the aerodynamic benefit of EPCR using computation fluid dynamics (CFD)‐based modeling from computed tomography (CT) scans. Study Design Retrospective case series. Methods Thirteen patients who underwent EPCR were followed from 2013 to 2017. They received a preoperative voice evaluation, microlaryngoscopy and bronchoscopy, dynamic voice CT (performed on patients seen from 2014 to study completion), and postoperative voice evaluation (n = 12). Postoperative inpatient days, complications, and postoperative endoscopic intervention were collected. To validate the aerodynamic benefit of EPCR, CFD modeling was carried out on one patient. Results Thirteen patients (nine females, nine with intubation injury, and four with post–airway reconstruction dysphonia) underwent EPCR at a mean age of 11.0 years. The mean preoperative and postoperative Pediatric Voice handicap Index scores were 53.8 and 33.8, respectively (P = .006). Mean maximum phonation time preoperatively and postoperatively was 5.3 and 6.7, respectively (P = .04). Of eight patients who underwent preoperative CT imaging, all demonstrated a posterior gap. Modeling demonstrated a change in flow and pressure. The mean hospital stay was 2.4 days. Nine patients underwent postoperative endoscopic intervention, and one experienced a complication that resolved with intervention. Conclusions Patients who underwent EPCR for dysphonia following intubation or airway reconstruction showed improvements in vocal efficiency, loudness, and perceived voice handicapping. Their hospital stay was brief, with few complications. CFD modeling corroborated these clinical findings. EPCR thus warrants consideration in the management of patients with posterior glottic diastasis. Level of Evidence 4 Laryngoscope, 129:S1–S9, 2019

show abstract

Aerodynamic and acoustic assessment in children following airway reconstruction: An assessment of feasibility

Cited by 18 publications

References 9 publications

Voice outcomes after pediatric airway reconstruction

Voice outcomes after pediatric airway reconstruction

Long-term voice outcome following partial cricotracheal resection in children for severe subglottic stenosis

Endoscopic posterior cricoid reduction: A surgical method to improve posterior glottic diastasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About