ArticleScience progress
Additional injection laryngoplasty as a salvage treatment for unilateral vocal fold paralysis.
Article in Science progress. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInjection laryngoplasty (IL) has been widely used as an initial treatment option for unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP). An additional (second) IL is considered a salvage treatment for unsatisfactory outcomes of initial IL resulting from inadequate injection or early resorption of the injection material. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of additional IL, distinguishing between "salvage" (within 4 months) and "repeated" injections (beyond 4 months), and to analyze prognostic factors for successful outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective study involved patients who received IL at Asan Medical Center from January 2014 to December 2020. Voice parameters were collected after each procedure, and those who conducted the statistical analysis were blinded to the study subjects. Among the 65 patients who underwent additional IL, 51 patients were enrolled in this study. Postinjection grade, roughness, breathiness, asthenia, strain (GRBAS) scales were used to determine satisfactory treatment outcomes. Success of the additional IL was defined as a postinjection grade of dysphonia score of 0 or 1, with a reduction in grade compared with the preinjection grade.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 61.6 years. Out of a total of 51 patients, 37 were men participating in the study. The odds ratio represents the likelihood of success in the second IL. Improved voice outcome after the additional IL was maintained in 23 (45%) patients. Compared with the failure group, the success group had a longer injection time interval between the initial and additional injection (9.1 vs. 7.4 months, respectively, p = 0.010). The success group had a higher proportion of patients with injection intervals >6 months (73.9% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.026). Logistic regression analysis revealed an injection interval >6 months had an odds ratio of 0.265 (confidence interval: 0.080-0.874, p = 0.029).
conclusionsAdditional injections would benefit the patients whose voice outcomes are maintained for a longer period (>6 months) after the first injection.
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.