Objective evaluation of the pharyngoesophageal segment as a source of substitute phonation in patients after total laryngectomy

The study aimed to identify objective predictors of the successful voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy to select the optimal method of voice restoration.

Material and Methods. The study included 60 laryngectomized male patients who were stratified into 2 equal groups depending on the patient’s choice of voice restoration: tracheoesophageal puncture or esophageal voice. A comprehensive assessment of the qualitative and quantitative parameters of the pharyngoesophageal segment was carried out using the diagnostic procedures, such as: fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, high-speed video endoscopy, and high-resolution pharyngoesophageal manometry. The results of examination of the pharyngoesophageal segment were compared with the results of voice rehabilitation.

Results. A significant difference in the resting pressure in the pharyngoesophageal segment between patients with successful and unsuccessful voice rehabilitation was found. The resting pressure in the pharyngoesophageal segment was higher in patients with unsuccessful voice rehabilitation than in patients with successful voice rehabilitation. Among patients with failed voice rehabilitation, 64 % had pseudodiverticula, 25 % had cicatricial strictures and 11 % had pharyngospasm. Pseudodiverticula were found only in patients who underwent vertical or apparatus pharyngeal closure. We described vibrating patterns of substitute phonation in laryngectomized patients and identified 5 different types of pseudoglottis. No significant differences between the methods of substitute phonation were found.

Conclusion. The state of pharyngoesophageal segment is an objective predictor of successful substitute phonation and depends on the surgical technique of pharyngeal closure, the volume of cancer treatment and the course of the postoperative period. A comprehensive assessment of the qualitative and quantitative parameters of the pharyngoesophageal segment using fiberendoscopic, fuoroscopic studies and highresolution pharyngoesophageal manometry allows prediction of voice rehabilitation outcomes.

1. Tkachenko G.A., Podvyaznikov S.О., Mudunov А.M., Obukhova О.A., Akhundov A.A., Khulamkhanova М.М., Skvortsova E.I. Psychological distress in cancer patients after laryngectomy. Head and Neck Tumors. 2019; 9(1): 104–10. (in Russian). doi: 10.17650/2222-1468-2019-9-1-104-110.

2. Allegra E., La Mantia I., Bianco M.R., Drago G.D., Le Fosse M.C., Azzolina A., Grillo C., Saita V. Verbal performance of total laryngectomized patients rehabilitated with esophageal speech and tracheoesophageal speech: impacts on patient quality of life. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2019; 12: 675–81. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S212793.

3. Slouka D., Kučera R., Hošek P., Gál B., Trčka O., Kostlivý T., Havel D. Key problems of the quality of life of patients after total lanyngectomy. Kontakt. 2018; 20(3): 230–6. doi: 10.1016/j.kontakt.2018.08.006.

4. Kapila M., Deore N., Palav R.S., Kazi R.A., Shah R.P., Jagade M.V. A brief review of voice restoration following total laryngectomy. Indian J Cancer. 2011; 48(1): 99–104. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.75841.

5. Balatskaya L.N., Choinzonov E.L., Krasavina E.A., Abdulkina N.G.1, Gorelova Yu.V. Modern approaches to vocal rehabilitation of laryngeal cancer patients using biological feedback and computer technologies. The Bulletin of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. 2006; 26(3): 133–6. (in Russian).

6. Krasavina E.A., Balatskaya L.N., Choinzonov E.L. Biofeedback in voice rehabilitation of patients after laringextomy. Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical Rehabilitation. 2019. 1(3): 32–6. (in Russian). doi: 10.36425/2658-6843-2019-3-32-36.

7. Albirmawy O.A., Elsheikh M.N., Saafan M.E., Elsheikh E. Managing problems with tracheoesophageal puncture for alaryngeal voice rehabilitation. J Laryngol Otol. 2006; 120(6): 470–7. doi: 10.1017/S0022215106000752.

8. Uklonskaya D.V., Kosova E.V. Speech Therapy Work on Improvement of Acoustic Characteristics of Sonorous Speech after Tracheoesophageal Bypass Surgery with Prosthetics in Persons with Removed Larynx. Malignant Tumours. 2020; 10(3s1): 102–3. (in Russian).

9. Kuzmin Y.N., Belotserkovsky I.V. The results of tracheoesophageal shunting in patients after laryngectomy, depending on the dose of radiation therapy. Oncological Journal. 2018; 12(1): 36–45. (in Russian).

10. Daikhes N.A., Vinogradov V.V., Reshulskii S.S., Fedorova E.B., Isaeva M.L. Comparative characteristics of methods for formation of pharyngo-esophageal anastomosis and tubeless tracheostomy in laryngectomized patients. Russian Otorhinolaryngology. 2023. 22(1): 18–23. (in Russian). doi: 10.18692/1810-4800-2023-1-18-23.

11. Balatskaya L.N., Krasavina E.A. Possibilities of voice rehabilitation of patients with laryngeal cancer after laryngectomy. Siberian Journal of Oncology. 2015; (s2): 13–5. (in Russian).

12. Chotipanich A. Total Laryngectomy: A Review of Surgical Techniques. Cureus. 2021; 13(9). doi: 10.7759/cureus.18181.

13. Fedorova E.B., Daikhes N.A., Vinogradov V.V., Reshulsky S.S., Khabazova A.M. Improving the Surgical Stage of Complex Rehabilitation of Patients with Laryngeal Cancer. Otorhinolaryngology. Eastern Europe. 2021; 11(3): 258–64. (in Russian). doi: 10.34883/PI.2021.11.3.014.

14. Kaibysheva V.O., Nikonov E.L., Bordin D.S., Morozov S.V., Valitova E.R., Isakov V.A., Smirnov A.A., Fedorov E.D., Shapovalyants S.G. Manometry of the esophagus of high resolution. Guidelines. Russian Journal of EvidenceBased Gastroenterology. 2018; 7(2–2): 3–55. (in Russian).