Biofilm formation on the Provox ActiValve: Composition and ingrowth analyzed by Illumina paired‐end RNA sequencing, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and confocal laser scanning microscopy

Abstract

Fluoroplastic material of Provox ActiValve seems insusceptible to destruction by Candida species, which could help improve durability of voice prostheses. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E432-E440, 2016.

Postlaryngectomy prosthetic voice rehabilitation outcomes in a consecutive cohort of 232 patients over a 13‐year period

“…For the regular VPs Provox2 and Vega, this was 63 and 66 days, respectively, and for the problem-solving ActiValve Light and Strong VPs, this was 143 and 186 days, respectively. 15 The increasing number of TLs after prior (chemo)radiotherapy since 1990 (68% in the present study and 45% in our historical cohort 4 ), which has a profound effect on the TEPtract, seems a likely explanation for the shorter device lifetime found in our study population. The main indication for replacement, transprosthetic leakage, was reported in 58% of all replacements.…”

“…With the increasing use of radiotherapy (RT) and the introduction of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in the 1990s, we have observed a decrease in primary TL and an increase in (C)RT as primary treatment modalities. 6,[12][13][14][15] These new VP's have, however, not been extensively evaluated yet in a long-term fashion. [9][10][11] In 2000, Op de Coul et al 4 published the long-term results of voice rehabilitation with the first Provox VPs in the Netherlands Cancer Institute.…”

Biofilm in voice prosthesis: A prospective cohort study and laboratory tests using sonication and SEM analysis

“…Moreover, the magnets embedded in the valve cause an active closure of the valve, which counteracts the under‐pressure issue . As has been already proven, the Provox ActiValve has a longer lifespan compared to Provox 2 …”

“…Candida species are already known to have a limited destructive effect on the fluoroplastic valve material of the Provox ActiValve . Patients with frequent leakage and replacement could take advantage of the Provox ActiValve.…”

In vitro biofilm growth on modern voice prostheses

“…In clinical studies, a wide variance in device lifetimes has been experienced, which is generally explained by individual lifestyle, nutritional situation, hygiene habits, radiotherapy, comedication, cancer stages, restrictiveness in indication for prosthesis replacement, and precision in the manufacturing process . Only the high‐priced Provox ActiValve prosthesis has been repeatedly reported to have a longer device lifetime, but healthcare insurances companies are reluctant to cover the higher expenses . Although multiple problem‐solving technologies have already been suggested, the in vivo device lifetimes of standard voice prostheses did not lengthen since the introduction of the Modified Robbins Device by Leunisse et al in 1999 …”