Krishnamurthy Arvind, Khwajamohiuddin Suhaildeen
1Surgical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), 38, Sardar Patel Rd, Adyar, Chennai, 600036 India.
2Preventive Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), 38, Sardar Patel Rd, Adyar, Chennai, 600036 India.
Indian J Surg Oncol. 2018 Mar;9(1):39-45. doi: 10.1007/s13193-017-0700-z. Epub 2017 Sep 6.
Tracheoesophageal voice puncture (TEP) coupled with the use of voice prosthesis has been considered as the gold standard for speech rehabilitation in patients of advanced laryngeal/hypopharyngeal carcinomas, who have undergone a total laryngectomy with or without partial pharyngectomy. Although prosthetic voice rehabilitation is commonly practiced worldwide including India, there is a paucity of published Indian data, more so in the current era of organ conservation. This study included 60 laryngectomized patients with a prosthetic voice rehabilitation at a tertiary cancer center in South India between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2013. Among the 60 patients, the primary site of cancer was the larynx in 43 patients and hypopharynx in the remaining 17. All patients had undergone a primary TEP insertion, 55 in the upfront setting and five in the salvage (post-radiation/chemo-radiation) setting. The ability to retain a successful trachea-esophageal speech on follow-up (median 15.5 months) in our series was around 82%. The mean device life of voice prosthesis in our patient cohort was 16 months. There was surprisingly no significant difference in the prosthesis device life on correlation with age, co-morbidities, habitat, literacy status, pre-operative tracheostomy, setting of surgery, and the extent of surgery. Our series has successfully demonstrated the safety and feasibility of using primary TEP coupled with the use of voice prosthesis for voice rehabilitation in properly selected and motivated patients of advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinomas across all clinical settings. A mean device life of 16 months makes prosthetic voice rehabilitation, an attractive as well as a financially viable option for patients in a resource constrained setting.
气管食管语音穿刺(TEP)联合使用语音假体被认为是晚期喉癌/下咽癌患者行全喉切除术(伴或不伴部分下咽切除术)后语音康复的金标准。尽管假体语音康复在包括印度在内的全球范围内普遍应用,但印度公开的数据较少,在当前器官保留时代更是如此。本研究纳入了2010年1月1日至2013年12月31日期间在印度南部一家三级癌症中心接受假体语音康复的60例喉切除患者。在这60例患者中,43例癌症原发部位为喉部,其余17例为下咽。所有患者均接受了初次TEP植入,55例为初始植入,5例为挽救性(放疗/放化疗后)植入。在我们的系列研究中,随访(中位时间15.5个月)时能够成功保留气管食管语音的比例约为82%。我们患者队列中语音假体的平均使用期限为16个月。令人惊讶的是,语音假体的使用期限与年龄、合并症、居住地区、文化程度、术前气管切开、手术时机及手术范围之间并无显著差异。我们的系列研究成功证明了在所有临床情况下,对于经过适当选择且有积极性的晚期喉癌和下咽癌患者,使用初次TEP联合语音假体进行语音康复的安全性和可行性。平均16个月的使用期限使假体语音康复成为资源受限环境下患者有吸引力且经济上可行的选择。