Quer M, Burgués-Vila J, García-Crespillo P
Otorhinolaryngology Service, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma, Barcelona, Spain.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992 Feb;118(2):188-90. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1992.01880020090021.
We studied the cost-efficiency profile of tracheoesophageal puncture with prosthesis insertion in alaryngeal patients who were given the opportunity of choosing between esophageal and prosthetic voice. A primary tracheoesophageal puncture was made in 28 patients who were undergoing total laryngectomy. Five of the patients were excluded from the study because of failure to phonate correctly with their prostheses. The remainder were given esophageal speech instruction while they were using tracheoesophageal speech, and were permanently allowed to shift between both techniques of alaryngeal voice. Seventy percent of the patients (16/23) left the prosthetic voice to use only esophageal speech, even though they agreed that prosthetic voice was superior to esophageal voice. The remaining 30% (7/23) continued to use tracheoesophageal speech almost exclusively. In the authors' opinion, primary tracheoesophageal punctures significantly provide both psychological and practical help, as they supply an immediate and clear postoperative voice, and one of every three patients will use them for daily oral communication. Nevertheless, esophageal speech is still the method of voice restoration preferred in our region by those of our patients who managed to learn it.
我们研究了在接受全喉切除术的无喉患者中，行气管食管穿刺并植入假体的成本效益情况，这些患者有机会在食管语音和假体语音之间进行选择。对28例行全喉切除术的患者进行了初次气管食管穿刺。其中5例患者因假体发声不正确而被排除在研究之外。其余患者在使用气管食管语音时接受了食管语音训练，并被允许在两种无喉语音技术之间永久切换。70%的患者（16/23）放弃了假体语音，仅使用食管语音，尽管他们承认假体语音优于食管语音。其余30%（7/23）几乎完全继续使用气管食管语音。在作者看来，初次气管食管穿刺显著提供了心理和实际帮助，因为它能立即提供清晰的术后语音，每三名患者中就有一名会将其用于日常口头交流。然而，食管语音仍然是我们地区那些成功学会它的患者首选的语音恢复方法。
