ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Benefits of prophylactic voice prosthesis replacement: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In this retrospective, single-center study conducted at a regional cancer center, we have analyzed whether prophylactic voice prosthesis replacement (PVPR) could reduce the occurrence of tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) dysfunction. Methods: We reviewed 2,431 cases of voice prosthesis (VP) replacement procedures performed in 327 patients between January 2017 and December 2022 at the Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Holy Cross Cancer Centre, Kielce, Poland. In the middle of this period (January 2020), the management of VP replacements was changed from reactive, unscheduled voice prosthesis replacement (UVPR), with a median device lifetime of 7 months, to prophylactic, scheduled replacement (PVPR) procedures occurring every 3 months. Results: The statistical analysis confirmed a significantly lower number of complications during the period of PVPR (2020-2022) compared to the previous period of UVPR (2017-2019). In the years 2017-2019, out of a total of 911 voice prosthesis replacements performed in 246 patients, 425 were associated with complications related to TEF (47%). In comparison, in the years 2020-2022 (following the introduction of PVPR), only 91 cases (6%) (p<0.001; r = 0.408) out of 1,520 voice prosthesis exchanges performed in 250 patients had related TEF complications. The types and occurrence of TEF complications remained the same in both time intervals (UVPR vs. PVPR), with widening of the fistula tract being the most common, comprising 80% and 78% of all TEF complications, respectively. Discussion: PVPR every 3 months can reduce fistula complications compared to a protocol with reactive replacement for voice prosthesis or TEF dysfunction.
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.