2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2015.04.042
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The changing face of the paediatric microlaryngobronchoscopy (MLB): A two year prospective study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
1
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…From a review of the literature, no study was identified examining coexistent upper and lower airway pathology diagnosed by CAE in a paediatric population. Fifteen per cent of patients demonstrated no pathology which is in keeping with previous studies 9 …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From a review of the literature, no study was identified examining coexistent upper and lower airway pathology diagnosed by CAE in a paediatric population. Fifteen per cent of patients demonstrated no pathology which is in keeping with previous studies 9 …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Fifteen per cent of patients demonstrated no pathology which is in keeping with previous studies. 9 We found that subglottic stenosis was the most common ENT finding. This was of particular interest when analysing the preterm subgroup.…”
Section: Synopsis Of Key Findingsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In most previous studies, laryngomalacia has been the most common cause of chronic stridor in children [26][27][28]. However, a survey conducted by Cadd et al in 2005 also described the rising incidence of subglottic stenosis and multiple laryngeal pathologies in children with stridor [29] In our study, we could find only one case out of thirty-five patients of chronic stridor where stridor was due to vocal cord paralysis. However, this has been described as one of the common causes of chronic stridor [30]The difference has been attributed to the small sample size of our study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 53%