Relationship between swallowing-related quality of life and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing in patients who underwent open partial horizontal laryngectomy
- 284 Downloads
Several studies have previously analyzed the relationship between QOL and signs of dysphagia in patients treated for head and neck cancer and have reported heterogeneous findings. To the best of our knowledge, no study has previously investigated this relationship among patients who underwent open partial horizontal laryngectomy (OPHL). The aim of the study is to determine if patient-reported swallowing-related QOL can discriminate between safe and unsafe swallowing in OPHL patients.
92 type I, type II, and type III OPHL patients at least 6 months postoperatively were recruited. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) was conducted using liquids, semisolids, and solids. FEES recordings were assessed through the penetration–aspiration scale, the pooling score and the dysphagia outcome and severity scale. All patients completed the MD Anderson dysphagia inventory (MDADI). Kruskal–Wallis test and post-hoc Mann Whitney U test were performed to compare MDADI scores among different level of airway invasion, post-swallow pharyngeal residue’s degree and overall dysphagia severity. ROC curves were generated to determine diagnostic accuracy of the MDADI.
Statistically significant differences in MDADI scores were found between level of airway invasion with semisolids and solids, degree of pharyngeal residue with solids, and severity of dysphagia. MDADI showed significant diagnostic accuracy only in the detection of moderate/severe pharyngeal residue and severe dysphagia; however, sensitivity and specificity were low.
Investigating patients’ perception of swallowing impairment and swallowing-related QOL is not sufficient to discriminate safe and unsafe swallowing in OPHL patients.
KeywordsOpen partial laryngectomy Swallowing Quality of life FEES MDADI
Nicole Pizzorni, Speech and Language Pathologist, functional analysis, conception and design, drafting the article, final approval of the version to be published; Antonio Schindler, phoniatrician who carried out the functional analysis, conception and design, drafting the article, final approval of the version to be published; Marco Fantini, data collection, conception and design, final approval of the version to be published; Andy Bertolin, surgeon who carried out the functional endoscopic study of swallowing, conception and design, final approval of the version to be published; Giuseppe Rizzotto, surgeon who performed surgical procedures, conception and design, final approval of the version to be published; Federico Ambrogi, statistical analysis, final approval of the version to be published; Giovanni Succo, surgeon who performed surgical procedures, conception and design, drafting the article, final approval of the version to be published; Erika Crosetti, surgeon who carried out the functional endoscopic study of swallowing, conception and design, final approval of the version to be published.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Luigi Sacco Hospital research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 2.Succo G, Peretti G, Piazza C, Remacle M, Eckel HE, Chevalier D, Simo R, Hantzakos AG, Rizzotto G, Lucioni M, Crosetti E, Antonelli AR (2014) Open partial horizontal laryngectomies: a proposal for classification by the working committee on nomenclature of the European Laryngological society. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271:2489–2496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-3024-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Schindler A, Pizzorni N, Mozzanica F, Fantini M, Ginocchio D, Bertolin A, Crosetti E, Succo G (2016) Functional outcomes after supracricoid laryngectomy: what do we not know and what do we need to know? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273:3459–3475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3822-3 (Epub 2015 Nov 6)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Schindler A, Favero E, Nudo S, Albera R, Schindler O, Cavalot AL (2006) Long‑term voice and swallowing modifications after supracricoid laryngectomy: objective, subjective and self‑assessment data. Am J Otolaryngol 27:378–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2006.01.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Schindler A, Fantini M, Pizzorni N, Crosetti E, Mozzanica F, Bertolin A, Ottaviani F, Rizzotto G, Succo G (2015) Swallowing, voice and quality of life after supratracheal laryngectomy: preliminary long‑term results. Head Neck 37:557–566. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23636 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Zhang SY, Lu ZM, Chen LS, Luo XN, Ge PJ, Song XH, Chen SH, Wu YL (2013) Supracricoid partial laryngectomy cricohyoidoepiglottopexy (SCPL-CHEP) versus vertical partial laryngectomy for the treatment of glottic carcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 270:1027–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2241-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Simonelli M, Ruoppolo G, de Vincentiis M, Di Mario M, Calcagno P, Vitiello C, Manciocco V, Pagliuca G, Gallo A (2010) Swallowing ability and chronic aspiration after supracricoid partial laryngectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 142:873–878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2010.01.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Gillespie MB, Brodsky MB, Day TA, Sharma AK, Lee FS, Martin-Harris B (2005) Laryngeal penetration and aspiration during swallowing after the treatment of advanced oropharyngeal cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 131:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.131.7.615 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.Pedersen A, Wilson J, McColl E, Carding P, Patterson J (2016) Swallowing outcome measures in head and neck cancer—how do they compare? Oral Oncol 52:104–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.10.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Florie M, Baijens L, Kremer B, Kross K, Lacko M, Verhees F, Winkens B (2016) Relationship between swallow-specific quality of life and fiber-optic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing findings in patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 38:E1848-E1856. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.24333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Schindler A, Borghi E, Tiddia C, Ginocchio D, Felisati G, Ottaviani F (2008) Adaptation and validation of the Italian MD Anderson dysphagia inventory (MDADI). Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 129:97–100Google Scholar
- 40.Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 41.Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 42.Cohen BH (2008) Explaining psychological statistics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 43.Chen AY, Frankowski R, Bishop-Leone J, Hebert T, Leyk S, Lewin J, Goepfert H (2001) The development and validation of a dysphagia-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer: the M. D. Anderson dysphagia inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 127:870–876PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 47.McHorney CA, Bricker DE, Kramer AE, Rosenbek JC, Robbins J, Chignell KA, Logemann JA, Clarke C (2000) The SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: I. Conceptual foundation and item development. Dysphagia 15:115–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004550010012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 50.Bjordal K, Ahlner-Elmqvist M, Tollesson E, Jensen AB, Razavi D, Maher EJ, Kaasa S (1994) Development of a European Organisation for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC) questionnaire module to be used in quality of life assessments in head and neck cancer patients. Acta Oncol 33:879–885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar