Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital, 330 Gray's Inn Road
London, WC1X 8DA, United Kingdom
NCT Number: NCT02973152
The purpose of this study is to help determine the most effective treatment for participants with Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis.
There are currently two types of operations used to treat this condition. One operation is called thyroplasty. Doctors place a small piece of safe plastic into the side of the participant's voice box to push the weak vocal cord into a position to enable better speech and swallowing. In the other operation called laryngeal reinnervation, doctors repair the neck nerve supply to the vocal cord using parts of other unaffected nerves to enable better speech and swallowing. The investigators do not know which of these methods is better and are conducting this study to start comparing the two operations so that a larger clinical trial can be conducted in the future to tell us which operation is best.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–70 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 2
London, WC1X 8DA, United Kingdom
Title: Does Laryngeal Reinnervation or Type I Thyroplasty give better voice results for patients with Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis (VOCALIST): a feasibility study
Short title: VOCALIST
Trial medication: Not Applicable
Phase of trial: Phase IIb
Objectives: The aim of the study is to establish the feasibility of a multicentre, randomised phase III clinical trial of surgical treatment for Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis (UVFP).
Main objectives are to test the feasibility of:
Type of trial: Quantitative and Qualitative Feasibility Study; multi-centre randomised controlled trial
Trial design and methods: 30 patients will be randomised to receive the Laryngeal Reinnervation or Type I Thyroplasty surgery.
Trial duration per participant: 12 months
Estimated total trial duration: 24 months
Planned trial sites: Multi-site; London, Poole and Manchester (3 sites).
Total number of participants planned: 30
Statistical methodology and analysis: The trial analysis will be descriptive and will be performed on an intention to treat basis. Primary and secondary outcomes will be described using proportions and means as appropriate, with confidence intervals. No formal comparisons will be made. The correlations between the voice outcome measures will be calculated. There is no planned interim analysis.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
This medialisation/augmentation technique is a static technique, performed under local anaesthesia that aims to improve the positioning of the paralysed vocal fold. It uses a silastic implant readily available in different sizes according to size of larynx and gender of the patient. The correct size can be determined intraoperatively by using a measuring device while listening and visualising the larynx with flexible fiberoptic scope simultaneously.
For laryngeal reinnervation, ansa cervicalis to recurrent laryngeal nerve repair technique will be used. In this technique, the functioning ansa cervicalis nerve that overlies the internal jugular vein and the distal stump of injured recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) will be identified and anastomosed without tension (Crumley RL. Teflon versus thyroplasty versus nerve transfer: a comparison. The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology. 1990;99(10 Pt 1):759-63).
Time frame: 24 months
From those participants who were eligible to enter the study, whether the participant was randomised (yes/no)
Time frame: 24 months
From those participants who were eligible to enter the study, whether the participant successfully received the allocated operation (yes/no)
Time frame: 24 months
From those participants who were eligible to enter the study, whether the participant completed the trial (yes/no)
Time frame: 24 months
Assessed by a Qualitative researcher via interviews with SMG members/recruiters which will explore views on the trial design and treatment groups ('arms'), perceptions of uncertainty/equipoise, views about eligibility criteria, and accounts of how the protocol is delivered in practice.
Time frame: 24 months
Assessed by a Qualitative researcher via interviews with SMG members/recruiters which will explore views on the trial design and treatment groups ('arms'), perceptions of uncertainty/equipoise, views about eligibility criteria, and accounts of how the protocol is delivered in practice.
Time frame: 24 months
Assessed by a Qualitative researcher via interviews with patients will explore the acceptability of the trial interventions and trial processes and reasons for participation / non-participation (where applicable).
Time frame: 24 months
Assessed by a Qualitative researcher via interviews with SMG members/recruiters which will explore views on the trial design and treatment groups ('arms'), perceptions of uncertainty/equipoise, views about eligibility criteria, and accounts of how the protocol is delivered in practice. Interviews with patients will explore the acceptability of the trial interventions and trial processes and reasons for participation / non-participation (where applicable).
Time frame: 24 months
Assessed by a Qualitative researcher via interviews with SMG members/recruiters which will explore views on the trial design and treatment groups ('arms'), perceptions of uncertainty/equipoise, views about eligibility criteria, and accounts of how the protocol is delivered in practice.Interviews with patients will explore the acceptability of the trial interventions and trial processes and reasons for participation / non-participation (where applicable).
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: Baseline, 6 months and 12 month post surgery
The secondary outcome measures will be plotted against time, and outcome differences between the surgical groups will be estimated, with 95% confidence intervals, using ANCOVA methodology that adjusts for baseline outcome measures.
Time frame: 24 months
A detailed cost analysis of laryngeal reinnervation and thyroplasty procedures will be undertaken, since these are likely to be major cost components affecting the relative cost-effectiveness of laryngeal reinnervation. This will include the costs of the index procedure (staff costs, theatre costs, costs of consumables, recovery costs), length of hospital stay for index procedure, post-operative ibuprofen, and speech and language therapy. Costs for the index procedure will be obtained from the hospital finance department.
Time frame: 24 months
An analysis of the feasibility study for a full economic evaluation of laryngeal reinnervation versus thyroplasty that will accompany the Phase III trial. This will be based on the idea that we will be aiming estimate the lifetime incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of laryngeal reinnervation versus thyroplasty, the outcome measure recommended by NICE when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of health care programmes in the NHS.
Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital
Other
Does Laryngeal Reinnervation or Type I Thyroplasty Give Better Voice Results for Patients With Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis (VOCALIST): a Feasibility Study.
Acronym: VOCALIST
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03790956
Cranial Nerve Diseases, Deglutition Disorders
Los Angeles, California, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT00213837
Cranial Nerve Diseases, Laryngeal Diseases
Strasbourg, France
View Trial DetailsNCT05963165
Cranial Nerve Diseases, Laryngeal Diseases
Roma, Italy
View Trial DetailsNCT03906877
Cranial Nerve Diseases, Laryngeal Diseases
Brussels, Belgium
View Trial Details