xRead - Swallowing Disorders in the Adult Patient (October 2024)

10976817, 2023, 1, Downloaded from https://aao-hnsfjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1177/01945998211072832 by University Of Miami Libraries, Wiley Online Library on [01/07/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

2 18

Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 168(1)

8

8

9

9

9

8

10

11

11

12

12

13

intervention Notes MINORS

(continued)

12mo Retrospective study; follow-up . 6 mo to account for

NS Retrospective study of an acute intervention; recovery of vocal fold motion after injection NS

NS Retrospective study of an acute intervention; 3/11 recovered vocal fold mobility

intervention; recovery of vocal fold motion after injection NS vocal fold motion NS;

potential effects of temporary IL at the time of LR individually extractable;

recovery of vocal fold motion

after intervention NS in acute interventions

2-4 wk Retrospective study; most data not individually extractable

1-3mo Prospective study; data not individually extractable;

compared IL and LF and found no difference in dysphagia outcomes

1-6mo Retrospective study; most data not individually extractable; focused on HVN injuries

severity in HVN injuries, but improvement still observed postprocedure

dysphagia data extractable for only 8 patients

Variable Retrospective study of an acute intervention; recovery of vocal fold motion after injection NS

individually extractable; most subjects did not have dysphagia/aspiration preintervention

NS Retrospective study; higher

Follow-up after

Within 5 d Retrospective study of an acute

Mean 4 mo Retrospective study; data not

Within 6 mo Retrospective study; recovery of

Within 4 mo Prospective study; most data not

outcomes, No. (%)

Dysphagia

Abu-Ghanem (2020) 53 30 RLN 57 IL Acute NS 22 18/22 (81.8) advanced to oral diet from NPO prior to IL

aspiration on FEES and returned to oral diet

Barbu (2015) 14,d 68 RLN 58 IL Acute None 40 28/40 (70) diet advanced from NPO to full oral intake; 5/5 (100) with documented aspiration resolved

Barnes (2020) 47 35 RLN NS IL Acute NS 8 5/8 (62.5) with aspiration on VFSS PRE resolved POST Bhattacharyya (2002) 17,d 52 RLN, 4 central, 10 IDIO/UNK NS 17 IL, 6 LF NS Minor, none; major, 1 severe aspiration after IL

Buyukatalay (2019) 44 10 RLN 45.7 LR Delayed NS 6 4/6 (67) improved/normalized EAT-10 POST

Cates (2016) 12 44 (site NS) NS 32 IL, 12 LF NS NS 30 Mean EAT-10 overall improved 12.2 to 7.7; IL group improved 11.6 to

8.1; LF group improved 13.8 to 5.1; 6/30 (20) with PRE dysphagia had improvement to normal EAT-10 score POST.

Damrose (2010) 40,c 4 HVN, 1 central, 33 RLN 60 IL Acute NS 10 Mean FOSS improved 3.7 to 2.2; 3/7 (42.9) NPO prior to procedure able to resume oral diet POST Dworkin (2006) 43 20 (site NS) NS 10 IL, 10 LF NS NS 20 Pooled subjective data indicate

improvement from moderate to mild dysphagia in both groups

function after procedure; 3/4 (75) with PRE nonoral enteral feeding returned to oral diet POST

Flint (1997) 19,c 48 RLN, 26 HVN, 10 IDIO 54 LF Delayed NS 52 49/52 (94) with dysphagia improved; 9/13 (69) with severe dysphagia able to return to oral diet Graboyes (2011) 37,d 20 RLN 57.7 IL Acute Minor, none; major, 1 aspiration during induction of anesthesia

18 17/18 (94) NPO able to resume oral feeding

5 2/5 (40) patients with aspiration resolved after procedure (based on VFSS/PAS)

Anderson (2001) 35,c,d 10 RLN, 1 central 49 IL Acute None 11 11/11 (100) improved with no

Fang (2011) 22 17HVN 54 9 IL, 8 LF NS NS 17 15/17 (88.2) regained swallowing

Dysphagia, No. b

Reported

complication

Timing of

intervention

Mean

age, y Intervention

No. a and

injury

site of

Table1. Summary of 26 Included Studies. Author (Year)