ArticleIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India2020
Voice Rehabilitation After Laryngectomy: A Regional Cancer Centre Experience and Review of Literature.
Article in Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic device as a facilitating resource for esophageal voice acquisition.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
- Quality of Life of Patients Using Esophageal Speech after Total Laryngectomy: A Systematic Review Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Pharyngeal reconstruction after total laryngectomy with sliding epiglottis: technical aspects with retrospective review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Esophageal Speech for a Patient with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Who Underwent a Central-part Laryngectomy to Prevent Aspiration: A Case Report.Progress in rehabilitation medicine · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alaryngeal speech in laryngectomees has revolutionized the patient outlook toward the morbid procedure and the concept of permanent stoma unlike olden era when stigma of stoma with loss of voice was rampant. To analyse acceptance of voice rehabilitation options and their success and management of complications in a tertiary care centre. All patients who underwent laryngectomy from August 2014 to 2018 June at our institution were included in the study. The voice rehabilitation options like oesophageal speech, tracheao-oesophageal puncture and voice prosthesis insertion (TEP), and electrolarynx were explained to the patients. The options put forward to the patients, the importance of Taub test, Interval between treatment and secondary TEP insertion, life span of the prosthesis, Patients acceptance and success rates and the troubleshooting were noted. A total of 96 patients underwent total laryngectomy, 72 patients were willing for rehabilitation. 15% (11) patients had primary TEP, 22% (16) had secondary TEP insertion, esophageal speech in 36% (26) patients and 27% (19) patients opted for the electrolarynx. The rest 24 patients were not keen on any further interventions after laryngectomy. Speech rehabilitation is an integral part in surgical management of carcinoma of the larynx. Alaryngeal speech in laryngectomees have revolutionized the patient outlook towards the morbid procedure. Esophageal speech is the least successful method of rehabilitation but still the cheapest method and requires a lot of motivation. Primary and Secondary TEP insertions have similar success rates. Successful treatment for cancer of larynx ends with successful voice rehabilitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.