Endoscopic Repair of Type 1 Laryngeal Clefts and Deep Interarytenoid Notches: Cold Steel Versus Laser.
Child
Child, Preschool
Congenital Abnormalities
/ surgery
Female
Hospitals, Pediatric
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Infant
Laryngoscopy
/ adverse effects
Larynx
/ abnormalities
Lasers
/ adverse effects
Male
Plastic Surgery Procedures
/ adverse effects
Registries
/ statistics & numerical data
Retrospective Studies
Time Factors
Treatment Failure
Laryngeal cleft
deep interarytenoid notch
endoscopic repair
laser
Journal
The Laryngoscope
ISSN: 1531-4995
Titre abrégé: Laryngoscope
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8607378
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2021
12 2021
Historique:
revised:
12
05
2021
received:
13
04
2021
accepted:
01
06
2021
pubmed:
30
6
2021
medline:
25
11
2021
entrez:
29
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Endoscopic repair is the preferred surgical treatment for type 1 laryngeal clefts (T1LCs) and deep interarytenoid notches (DINs). No studies exist showing differences in repair rates using laser and cold steel. Our objective is to assess overall success and revision rate for endoscopic cleft repair and determine whether there is any difference in surgical outcomes between cold steel and laser techniques. Retrospective chart review, cohort study. Retrospective review at a quaternary care pediatric hospital. Included all patients who underwent endoscopic repair for T1LCs and DINs between January 2010 and December 2019. Demographics, comorbidities, surgical data, outcomes, and revision status were collected and analyzed. We excluded patients who did not have a follow-up at our institution. A total of 194 patients were identified, 14 were excluded for lack of follow-up data so 180 were analyzed. Of these, 127 had cold steel repair and 53 had laser repair. There is no significant difference in demographics or comorbidities. In the cold steel group, 4 of 127 (3.1%) had breakdown and in the laser group, 10 of 53 (18.9%) had breakdown. Patients who failed after a cold steel repair tended to break down later (median 12.7 months) when compared to laser repairs (median 2.1 months). Nine of the 10 patients with breakdown after laser repair were noted on initial postoperative evaluation. Endoscopic cleft repair is a well-described and effective method for repair of T1LCs and DINs. Both cold steel and laser have high success rates; however, higher failure rates were noted in the laser repair group. Failure after laser repair may occur earlier than failure after cold steel repair. But this did not reach significance. 3 Laryngoscope, 131:2805-2810, 2021.
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2805-2810Informations de copyright
© 2021 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.
Références
Benjamin B, Inglis A. minor congenital laryngeal clefts: diagnosis and classification. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1989;98:417-420. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348948909800603.
Jefferson ND, Carmel E, Cheng ATL. Low inter-arytenoid height: a subclassification of type 1 laryngeal cleft diagnosis and management. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2015;79:31-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2014.10.040.
Bakthavachalam S, Schroeder JW, Holinger LD. Diagnosis and management of type I posterior laryngeal clefts. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2010;119:239-248. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348941011900406.
Isaac A, El-Hakim H. Type 1 laryngeal cleft and feeding and swallowing difficulties in infants and toddlers: a review. Clin Otolaryngol 2019;44:107-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13223.
Rahbar R, Chen JL, Rosen RL, et al. Endoscopic repair of laryngeal cleft type I and type II: when and why? Laryngoscope 2009;119:1797-1802. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20551.
Johnston DR, Watters K, Ferrari LR, Rahbar R. Laryngeal cleft: evaluation and management. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014;78:905-911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2014.03.015.
Basharat U, Schraff S, Stevens LM, et al. Deep interarytenoid notch in young children managed with systematic thickener wean and injection laryngoplasty. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2019;118:115-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.12.032.
Osborn AJ, de Alarcon A, Tabangin ME, Miller CK, Cotton RT, Rutter MJ. Swallowing function after laryngeal cleft repair: more than just fixing the cleft. Laryngoscope 2014;124:1965-1969. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24643.
Balakrishnan K, Cheng E, de Alarcon A, Sidell DR, Hart CK, Rutter MJ. Outcomes and resource utilization of endoscopic mass-closure technique for laryngeal clefts. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2015;153:119-123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599815576718.
Isaac A, Svystun O, Johannsen W, El-Hakim H. Injection augmentation and endoscopic repair of type 1 laryngeal clefts: development of a management algorithm. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020;49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-020-00447-0.
Coppess S, Padia R, Horn D, et al. Standardizing laryngeal cleft evaluations: reliability of the interarytenoid assessment protocol. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2019;160:533-539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599818806283.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377-381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.
Pettersson G. Inhibited separation of larynx and the upper part of trachea from oesophagus in a newborn; report of a case successfully operated upon. Acta Chir Scand 1955;110:250-254.
Robie DK, Pearl RH, Gonsales C, Restuccia RD, Hoffman MA. Operative strategy for recurrent laryngeal cleft: a case report and review of the literature. J Pediatr Surg 1991;26:971-974. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3468(91)90845-K.
Koltai PJ, Morgan D, Evans JNG. Endoscopic repair of Supraglottic laryngeal clefts. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1991;117:273-278. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1991.01870150041004.
Kubba H, Bailey M, Gibson D, Hartley B. Techniques and outcomes of laryngeal cleft repair: an update to the great Ormond street hospital series. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2005;114:309-313. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940511400410.
Rahbar R, Rouillon I, Roger G, et al. The presentation and Management of Laryngeal Cleft: a 10-year experience. Arch Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2006;132:1335-1341. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.132.12.1335.
Aljomah D, Alshammari J. Laser assisted double-layer endoscopic repair of laryngeal clefts: our experience in 11 cases. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;69:307-312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-017-1104-7.
Watters K, Russell J. Diagnosis and management of type 1 laryngeal cleft. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2003;67:591-596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-5876(03)00058-2.
de Alarcón A, Osborn AJ, Tabangin ME, et al. Laryngotracheal cleft repair in children with complex airway anomalies. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015;141:828-833. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2015.1419.
Durkin GE, Duncavage JA, Toohill RJ, Tieu TM, Caya JG. Wound healing of true vocal cord squamous epithelium after CO2 laser ablation and cup forceps stripping. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1986;95:273-277. https://doi.org/10.1177/01945998860953P102.
Sinha UK, Gallagher LA. Effects of steel scalpel, ultrasonic scalpel, CO2 laser, and monopolar and bipolar electrosurgery on wound healing in Guinea pig oral mucosa. Laryngoscope 2003;113:228-236. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200302000-00007.
Otteson TD, Sandulache VC, Barsic M, Disilvio GM, Hebda PA, Dohar JE. Acute and chronic changes in the subglottis induced by graded carbon dioxide laser injury in the rabbit airway. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;134:694-702. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.134.7.694.
Zhang Y, Cao L, Chen Q, et al. Experimental study on different power CO2 laser for vocal cord injury. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 2011;46:1039-1041.