Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 274, Issue 1, pp 337–346 | Cite as

Telephonic voice intelligibility after laryngeal cancer treatment: is therapeutic approach significant?

  • Erika Crosetti
  • Marco Fantini
  • Giulia Arrigoni
  • Laura Salonia
  • Agata Lombardo
  • Alessio Atzori
  • Valentina Panetta
  • Antonio Schindler
  • Andy Bertolin
  • Giuseppe Rizzotto
  • Giovanni Succo
Laryngology

Abstract

The aim was to investigate telephonic voice intelligibility in patients treated for laryngeal cancer using different approaches. In total, 90 patients treated for laryngeal cancer using different approaches and 12 healthy volunteers were recruited. Each patient and each healthy control read a list of words and sentences during a telephone call. Six auditors listened to each telephonic recording and transcribed the words and sentences they understood. Mean intelligibility rates for each treatment were assessed and compared. Regarding words, the poorest intelligibility was noted for type II open partial horizontal laryngectomies, followed by total laryngectomies. The best intelligibility was found for transoral laser microsurgery, followed by radiotherapy alone. For sentences, the poorest intelligibility was noted for type II open partial horizontal laryngectomies, followed by chemoradiotherapy. The best intelligibility was found for radiotherapy alone and transoral laser microsurgery. More aggressive surgery as well as chemoradiotherapy correlated with significantly poorer outcomes. Transoral laser microsurgery or radiotherapy alone ensured the best telephonic voice intelligibility. Intermediate-advanced T stages at diagnosis also showed significantly poorer intelligibility outcomes, suggesting that T stage represents an independent negative prognostic factor for voice intelligibility after treatment.

Keywords

Laryngectomy Transoral laser microsurgery Radiotherapy Chemoradiotherapy Laryngeal cancer Telephone communication 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Sincere thanks to Professor AR Antonelli for valuable suggestions and encouragement to continue research in the field of laryngeal oncology and to Miss V. Novanta and Dr. V. Carbonaro for their help as listeners.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There are no competing interests for this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Yorkston KM, Bourgeois MS, Baylor CR (2010) Communication and aging. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 21(2):309–319CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The World in 2014: ICT Facts and Figures. http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx). Accessed May 2016
  3. 3.
    Mosconi P, Cifani S, Crispino S, Fossati R, Apolone G, Head and Neck Cancer Italian Working Group (2000) The performance of Sf-36 health survey in patients with laryngeal cancer. Head Neck 22:175–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Weinstein GS, El-Sawy MM, Ruiz C et al (2001) Laryngeal preservation with supracricoid partial laryngectomy results in improved quality of life when compared with total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 111:191–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Olthoff A, Steuer-Vogt MK, Licht K, Sauer-Goenen M, Werner C, Ambrosch P (2006) Quality of life after treatment for laryngeal carcinomas. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 68:253–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Laccourreye H, Laccourreye O, Weinstein G, Menard M, Brasnu D (1990) Supracricoid laryngectomy with cricohyoidopexy: a partial laryngeal procedure for selected supraglottic and transglottic carcinomas. Laryngoscope 100:735–741PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group (1991) Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 324:1685–1690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Vincentiis M, Minni A, Gallo A, Di Nardo A (1998) Supracricoid partial laryngectomies: oncologic and functional results. Head Neck 20:504–509CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bron L, Brossard E, Monnier P, Pasche P (2000) Supracricoid partial laryngectomy with cricohyoidoepiglottopexy and cricohyoidopexy for glottic and supraglottic carcinomas. Laryngoscope 110:627–634CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forastiere AA, Goepfert H, Maor M et al (2003) Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med 349:2091–2098CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lefebvre JL (2006) Laryngeal preservation in head and neck cancer: multidisciplinary approach. Lancet Oncol 7:747–755CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Virgilio A, Fusconi M, Gallo A et al (2012) The oncologic radicality of supracricoid partial laryngectomy with cricohyoidopexy in the treatment of advanced N0–N1 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Laryngoscope 122:826–833CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rizzotto G, Crosetti E, Lucioni M, Succo G (2012) Subtotal laryngectomy: outcomes of 469 patients and proposal of a comprehensive and simplified classification of surgical procedures. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269:1635–1646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Caicedo-Granados E, Beswick DM, Christopolous A et al (2013) Oncologic and functional outcomes of partial laryngeal surgery for intermediate-stage laryngeal cancer. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148:235–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Forastiere AA, Zhang Q, Weber RS et al (2013) Long-term results of RTOG 91-11: a comparison of three nonsurgical treatment strategies to preserve the larynx in patients with locally advanced larynx cancer. J Clin Oncol 31:845–852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rizzotto G, Crosetti E, Lucioni M et al (2015) Oncological outcomes of supratracheal laryngectomy: a critical analysis. Head Neck 37(10):1417–1424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Remacle M, Eckel HE, Antonelli A et al (2000) Endoscopic cordectomy. A proposal for a classification by the Working Committee, European Laryngological Society. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 257(4):227–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Succo G, Peretti G, Piazza C et al (2014) Open partial horizontal laryngectomies: a proposal for classification by the Working Committee on Nomenclature of the European Laryngological Society. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271(9):2489–2496CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gli Italiani passano un quarto della giornata al telefono [The Italians spend a quarter of the day on the phone] https://cellulari.supermoney.eu/news/2012/05/in-tempo-di-crisi-al-cellulare-non-si-rinuncia-gli-italiani-passano-il-25-del-loro-tempo-al-telefonino-003819.html; http://www.supermoney.eu. Accessed May 2016
  20. 20.
    Eksteen EC, Rieger J, Nesbitt M, Seikaly H (2003) Comparison of voice characteristics following three different methods of treatment for laryngeal cancer. J Otolaryngol 32:250–253CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saito K, Araki K, Ogawa K, Shiotani A (2009) Laryngeal function after supracricoid laryngectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140:487–492CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Webster KT, Samlan RA, Jones B, Bunton K, Tufano RP (2010) Supracricoid partial laryngectomy: swallowing, voice, and speech outcomes. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 119:10–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    So YK, Yun YS, Baek CH, Jeong HS, Son YI (2009) Speech outcome of supracricoid partial laryngectomy: comparison with total laryngectomy and anatomic considerations. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 141:770–775CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laudadio P, Presutti L, Dall’olio D, Cunsolo V, Condslici R, Amorosa L (2006) Supracricoid laryngectomies: long-term oncological and functional results. Acta Otolaryngol 126:640–649CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bron L, Pasche P, Brossard E, Monnier P, Schweizer V (2002) Functional analysis after supracricoid partial laryngectomy with cricohyoidoepiglottopexy. Laryngoscope 122:1289–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dworkin JP, Meleca RJ, Zacharek MA et al (2003) Voice and deglutition functions after the supracricoid and total laryngectomy procedures for advanced stage laryngeal carcinoma. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129:311–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Torrejano G, Guimarães I (2009) Voice quality after supracricoid laryngectomy and total laryngectomy with insertion of voice prosthesis. J Voice 23:240–246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schindler A, Fantini M, Pizzorni N et al (2015) Swallowing, voice, and quality of life after supratracheal laryngectomy: preliminary long-term results. Head Neck 37(4):557–566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schindler A, Pizzorni N, Fantini M et al (2016) Long-term functional results after open partial horizontal laryngectomy type IIa and type IIIa: a comparison study. Head Neck 38(Suppl 1):E1427–E1435. doi: 10.1002/hed.24254 (Epub 2015 Nov 11) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    D’Alatri L, Bussu F, Scarano E, Paludetti G, Marchese MR (2012) Objective and subjective assessment of tracheoesophageal prosthesis voice outcome. J Voice 26(5):607–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Moerman M, Martens JP, Dejonckere P (2004) Application of the Voice Handicap Index in 45 patients with substitution voicing after total laryngectomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 261(8):423–428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pereira da Silva A, Feliciano T, Vaz Freitas S, Esteves S, Almeida E, Sousa C (2015) Quality of life in patients submitted to total laryngectomy. J Voice 29(3):382–388CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robertson SM, Yeo JC, Dunnet C, Young D, Mackenzie K (2012) Voice, swallowing, and quality of life after total laryngectomy: results of the west of Scotland laryngectomy audit. Head Neck 34(1):59–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schindler A, Mozzanica F, Ginocchio D, Invernizzi A, Peri A, Ottaviani F (2012) Voice-related quality of life in patients after total and partial laryngectomy. Auris Nasus Larynx 39(1):77–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Peretti G, Piazza C, Balzanelli C, Mensi MC, Rossini M, Antonelli AR (2003) Preoperative and postoperative voice in Tis-T1 glottic cancer treated by endoscopic cordectomy: an additional issue for patient counseling. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 112(9 Pt 1):759–763CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Peretti G, Piazza C, Del Bon F et al (2013) Function preservation using transoral laser surgery for T2–T3 glottic cancer: oncologic, vocal, and swallowing outcomes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 270(8):2275–2281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Czecior E, Orecka B, Pawlas P et al (2012) Comparative assessment of the voice in patients treated for early glottis cancer by laser cordectomy or radiotherapy. Otolaryngol Pol 66(6):407–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Aaltonen LM, Rautiainen N, Sellman J et al (2014) Voice quality after treatment of early vocal cord cancer: a randomized trial comparing laser surgery with radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 90(2):255–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cohen SM, Garrett CG, Dupont WD, Ossoff RH, Courey MS (2006) Voice-related quality of life in T1 glottic cancer: irradiation versus endoscopic excision. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 115(8):581–586CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lau VH, Leonard RJ, Goodrich S et al (2012) Voice quality after organ-preservation therapy with definitive radiotherapy for laryngeal cancer. Head Neck 34(7):943–948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Al-Mamgani A, Tans L, van Rooij P, Levendag PC (2012) A single-institutional experience of 15 years of treating T3 laryngeal cancer with primary radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1 83(3):1000–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Campos RJ, Maciel CT, Cesca MG, Leite IC (2011) Voice analysis after cancer treatment with organ preservation. Head Neck Oncol 19(3):19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Carrara-de Angelis E, Feher O, Barros AP, Nishimoto IN, Kowalski LP (2003) Voice and swallowing in patients enrolled in a larynx preservation trial. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129(7):733–738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erika Crosetti
    • 1
  • Marco Fantini
    • 2
  • Giulia Arrigoni
    • 2
  • Laura Salonia
    • 3
  • Agata Lombardo
    • 2
  • Alessio Atzori
    • 4
  • Valentina Panetta
    • 5
  • Antonio Schindler
    • 6
  • Andy Bertolin
    • 7
  • Giuseppe Rizzotto
    • 7
  • Giovanni Succo
    • 2
  1. 1.Head and Neck ServiceCandiolo Cancer Institute, FPO IRCCSCandioloItaly
  2. 2.Otorhinolaryngology Service, Department of Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga HospitalUniversity of TurinTurinItaly
  3. 3.Otorhinolaryngology Service, Department of Surgery, Città della Salute e della Scienza HospitalUniversity of TurinTurinItaly
  4. 4.National Institute of Metrological ResearchTurinItaly
  5. 5.L’altrastatistica srl, Consultancy and Training, Biostatistics officeRomeItaly
  6. 6.Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences “L. Sacco”University of MilanMilanItaly
  7. 7.Otorhinolaryngology ServiceVittorio Veneto HospitalTrevisoItaly

Personalised recommendations