ArticleHead & neck2025
The Benefits of Silicone Laryngectomy Tubes at the Time of Laryngectomy-A Case Series Spanning 17 Years.
Article in Head & neck, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough total laryngectomy (TL) is a well-established surgical procedure with clear functional or oncologic indications, the peri- and postoperative care for those undergoing TL is variable, particularly regarding postlaryngectomy tracheostoma management. This study examined TL outcomes from a single institution with the immediate perioperative use of soft silicone laryngectomy tubes. More specifically, we explored potential complications associated with immediate perioperative use of a flexible laryngectomy tube (LaryTube and StomaSoft) and the use of heat and moisture exchange (HME) devices in association with peri- and postoperative care.
methodsA case series including all patients undergoing TL by one primary surgeon at a tertiary care hospital between 2006 and 2023 were assessed. Variables of interest included hospital average length of stay (LOS) in hospital, use of laryngectomy tube and an HME, primary tracheoesophageal puncture voice restoration at time of TL, discharge feeding, stoma-related complications, and overall complications.
resultsSeventy-two patients were included over the study period, and all utilized a laryngectomy tube and HME in the perioperative period without complications. Fifty-six patients (77.7%) had concurrent neck dissections and nine (15%) underwent total laryngopharyngectomy. Sixty-two patients (86%) underwent TL for squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx or hypopharynx and 35 of these (56%) were salvage surgeries. Mean LOS was 8.4 (3-45) days, and 63 patients (88%) were discharged with nasal gastric tube feeding. Of the six patients (8%) who were readmitted for complications, zero (0%) were related to the laryngectomy tube or to stoma-related complications (e.g., dehiscence, infection, mucous plugging). No patient who utilized a laryngectomy tube and HME device in the perioperative period experienced stomal stenosis.
conclusionsLaryngectomy tubes combined with an HME can be employed safely and successfully in a high percentage of laryngectomy patients placed perioperative. No instances of postlaryngectomy tracheostoma stenosis occurred in association with perioperative laryngectomy tube with HME use. These collective data support the use of a laryngectomy tube with HME in the immediate perioperative period, with low risk of complications.
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.