Hacettepe University Hospital
Ankara, 06100, Turkey (Türkiye)
NCT Number: NCT01824849
Total arytenoidectomy is claimed to increase risk of aspiration and cause more voice loss than other operations performed for bilateral vocal fold paralysis (BVFP). However, objective evidence for such conclusion is lacking. There is no study comparing swallowing and voice after total and partial arytenoidectomy.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–75 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Ankara, 06100, Turkey (Türkiye)
Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, case-control Setting: Tertiary, referral, university Patients: Twenty patients with BVFP Intervention: Endoscopic total and partial arytenoidectomy
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Endoscopic total arytenoidectomy was performed on patients with bilateral vocal fold paralysis
Endoscopic partial arytenoidectomy was performed on patients with bilateral vocal fold paralysis
Time frame: From the day of operation until 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Preoperative examinations were repeated 1 year after surgery.
Time frame: At the day of operation
The duration of operation was measured in minutes at the day of operation.
Time frame: From the day of operation until 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Voice Handicap Index is a 30-item questionnaire. Possible points change between 0 to 120. Zero means normal voice, 120 means the worst voice. Preoperative examinations were repeated 1 year after surgery.
Time frame: From the day operation until 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Fundamental frequency (Hertz), absolute jitter (microseconds), shimmer percent (%), noise to harmonic ratio will be measured as physical measures of voice.
Time frame: From the day of operation until 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Maximum phonation time (seconds), mean flow rate (liters/second), mean resistance (cmH20/liter/second), mean power (Watt), mean efficiency (ppm) and mean pressure (cmH2O)are obtained as physical measures of aerodynamic analysis.
Time frame: 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Breathing ability was evaluated on a scale of -2 to +2 (-2: significantly worse; -1: somewhat worse; 0: no change; +1: somewhat better; +2: significantly better).
Time frame: From the day of operation until 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Subjective comparison of pre- and postoperative voice on a scale of -2 to +2 (-2: significantly worse; -1: somewhat worse; 0: no change; +1: somewhat better; +2: significantly better).
Time frame: 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Speech intensity is measured in decibels.
Time frame: 52 weeks after arytenoidectomy
Functional Outcome Swallowing Scale: 0-5 (0: Normal function and asymptomatic; 1: Normal function with episodic or daily symptoms of dysphagia; 2: Compensated abnormal function manifested by significant dietary modifications or prolonged mealtime (without weight loss or aspiration); 3: Decompensated abnormal function with weight loss of <10% of body weight over 6 months due to dysphagia; or daily cough, gagging or aspiration during meals; 4: Severely decompensated abnormal function with weight loss of >10% of body weight over 6 months due to dysphagia; or severe aspiration with bronchopulmonary complications. Non oral feeding for most nutrition; 5: Non oral feeding for all nutrition).
Hacettepe University
Other
The Comparison of Voice and Swallowing Parameters After Endoscopic Total and Partial Arytenoidectomy Using Medially Based Mucosal Advancement Flap Technique for Bilateral Abductor Vocal Fold Paralysis: A Randomized Trial
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.
NCT06227234
Airway Obstruction, Choking
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
View Trial DetailsNCT06742476
Airway Obstruction, Respiration Disorders
Al Fayyum, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT06609499
Airway Obstruction, Respiration Disorders
Radom, Masovian Voivodeship, Poland
View Trial DetailsNCT05748626
Airway Obstruction, Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms
Chicago, Illinois, United States
View Trial Details