Indications and techniques of endoscopy in evaluation of cervical dysphagia: Comparison with radiographic techniques

Kidder, Thomas M.; Langmore, Susan E.; Martin, Brigitte

doi:10.1007/bf00301919

Cited by 76 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The FEES, done at bedside, avoids irradiation exposure, is repeatable as often as needed, uses regular food, and can be videotaped for review [10,11,13,15,16]. In a large, heterogeneous population we conclude that the FEES is a reliable, transportable, repeatable, and patientfriendly method of identifying silent aspiration.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Dysphagia to Identify Silent Aspiration

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The traditional bedside dysphagia evaluation has not been able to identify silent aspiration because the pharyngeal phase of swallowing could not be objectively assessed. To date, only videofluoroscopy has been used to detect silent aspiration. This investigation assessed the aspiration status of 400 consecutive, at risk subjects by fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Our study demonstrated that 175 of 400 (44%) subjects were without aspiration, 115 of 400 (29%) exhibited aspiration with a cough reflex, and 110 of 400 (28%) aspirated silently. No significant differences were observed for age or gender and aspiration status. The FEES, done at bedside, avoids irradiation exposure, is repeatable as often as necessary, uses regular food, can be videotaped for review, and is a patient-friendly method of identifying silent aspiration.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Dysphagia to Identify Silent Aspiration

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, for a clinical definition of dysphagia, in particular oropharyngeal dysphagia, fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) may be used [8,9,10,11]. A multitude of studies have shown a high level of agreement between videofluoroscopy and FEES, and the use of the term ‘gold standard' as applied to fluoroscopy is no longer appropriate [12,13,14,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complications with Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing in 2,820 Examinations

Nacci

Matteucci²,

Romeo³

et al. 2016

Folia Phoniatr Logop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To perform a retrospective evaluation of the incidence of complications and adverse events during fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in 2,820 examinations. Patients and Methods: Subjects included in- and outpatients at Pisa University Hospital referred for FEES by other physicians due to dysphagia symptoms. Neurologic diseases were the most commonly diagnosed conditions in the patients tested (48.3%). Informed consent was obtained from all subjects. Results: Our study showed minor side effects (discomfort, occasional gagging and vomiting) and a few complications [three cases of anterior epistaxis (0.1%), one case of posterior epistaxis (0.04%), three cases of vasovagal syncope (0.1%) and two cases of laryngospasm (0.07%)]. These cases of laryngospasm occurred in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and spontaneously resolved after some difficulty. Conclusions: Our study confirms the published data regarding the safety of FEES and the incidence of complications with this procedure, but also highlights that in neurologic patients with neurodegenerative diseases such as ALS, laryngospasm is more likely to occur as a severe complication. The overall risk of FEES is minimal, but it is recommended that clinicians be well trained in recognising the signs and symptoms of adverse reactions and be ready to take appropriate action if these occur.

show abstract

“…Clinical application of this procedure has also been limited for this reason. In the past 5-10 years, videonasendoscopy has been used to examine the oropharynx before and during deglutition [7,11,12,19,20]. The endoscopic procedure has been labeled fiberoptic endoscopic examination of swallowing (FEES) by some clinicians and is in use in some facilities as the instrumental swallow assessment, particularly when videofluoroscopy is not available or difficult to obtain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normal Swallowing Physiology as Viewed by Videofluoroscopy and Videoendoscopy

Logemann

Rademaker

Pauloski

et al. 1998

Folia Phoniatr Logop

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines normal oropharyngeal swallow physiology in 8 young adult males with concurrent videofluoroscopy and videoendoscopy. Twelve swallows were examined for each subject, 3 swallows each of 1 and 5 ml of thin liquid at each of two endoscopic positions: (1) the tip of the endoscope just at or below the tip of the uvula (high position), and (2) the tip of the endoscope just below the tip of the epiglottis (low position). Results indicate that if the clinician is interested in laryngeal events occurring before and after swallow, videoendoscopy with the endoscope in the low position is the procedure of choice. To evaluate pharyngeal anatomy and/or the presence of food in the pharynx before or after swallow, either endoscopy with the endoscope in the high position or videofluoroscopy can be used. However, if the clinician is interested in pharyngeal physiology during swallow, videofluoroscopy is a better diagnostic procedure.

show abstract

Indications and techniques of endoscopy in evaluation of cervical dysphagia: Comparison with radiographic techniques

Cited by 76 publications

References 10 publications

Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Dysphagia to Identify Silent Aspiration

Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Dysphagia to Identify Silent Aspiration

Complications with Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing in 2,820 Examinations

Normal Swallowing Physiology as Viewed by Videofluoroscopy and Videoendoscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About