Quality of Life After Total LaryngectomyVoice-Related Quality of Life After Total Laryngectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Tracheoesophageal voice— VrQoL— Total laryngectomy— Esophageal voice— VHI
Journal
Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation
ISSN: 1873-4588
Titre abrégé: J Voice
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8712262
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Nov 2021
08 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
31
07
2021
revised:
06
09
2021
accepted:
07
09
2021
entrez:
12
11
2021
pubmed:
13
11
2021
medline:
13
11
2021
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To compare voice rehabilitation-related quality of life among patients surgically treated for total laryngectomy and rehabilitated with esophageal (EV) and tracheoesophageal (TEV) voice. A systematic literature review of articles from the past 20 years was conducted, and only full-text English articles comparing VTE and EV results in laryngectomized patients were included. We provided 15 articles for a total of 1085 laryngectomized patients undergoing voice rehabilitation, of which 869 (80.1%) were treated with voice prosthesis while 216 (19.9%) to esophageal speech. Pooled VHI outcomes showed a significantly better score for the TEV group than EV one (31.93±12.11 versus 35.39±20.6; P = 0.003), but no significant difference was recorded at VrQoL (8.27±5.98 versus 9.27±2.02; P = 0.19). TEV and EV are both effective procedures in voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Although TEV allows for significantly better speech performance, it does not necessarily correlate with a high VrQoL.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To compare voice rehabilitation-related quality of life among patients surgically treated for total laryngectomy and rehabilitated with esophageal (EV) and tracheoesophageal (TEV) voice.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic literature review of articles from the past 20 years was conducted, and only full-text English articles comparing VTE and EV results in laryngectomized patients were included.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We provided 15 articles for a total of 1085 laryngectomized patients undergoing voice rehabilitation, of which 869 (80.1%) were treated with voice prosthesis while 216 (19.9%) to esophageal speech. Pooled VHI outcomes showed a significantly better score for the TEV group than EV one (31.93±12.11 versus 35.39±20.6; P = 0.003), but no significant difference was recorded at VrQoL (8.27±5.98 versus 9.27±2.02; P = 0.19).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
TEV and EV are both effective procedures in voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Although TEV allows for significantly better speech performance, it does not necessarily correlate with a high VrQoL.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34763996
pii: S0892-1997(21)00298-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2021.09.040
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Voice Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.