Advertisement

Dysphagia

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 339–344 | Cite as

Changes in Swallowing-related Quality of Life After Endoscopic Treatment For Zenker’s Diverticulum Using SWAL-QOL Questionnaire

  • C. Colpaert
  • O. M. Vanderveken
  • K. Wouters
  • P. Van de Heyning
  • C. Van Laer
Review Article

Abstract

Dysphagia affects the most cardinal of human functions: the ability to eat and drink. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate swallowing dysfunction in patients diagnosed with Zenker’s diverticulum using the Swallowing Quality of Life (SWAL-QOL) questionnaire preoperatively. In addition, SWAL-QOL was used to assess changes in the outcome of swallowing function after endoscopic treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum compared to baseline. Pre- and postoperative SWAL-QOL data were analyzed in 25 patients who underwent endoscopic treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum between January 2011 and December 2013. Patients were treated by different endoscopic techniques, depending on the size of the diverticulum: CO2 laser technique or stapler technique, or the combination of both techniques used in larger diverticula. Their mean age was 69 years, and 28% of patients were female. The mean interval between endoscopic surgery and completion of the postoperative SWAL-QOL was 85 days. The median (min–max) preoperative total SWAL-QOL score was 621 (226–925) out of 1100, indicating the perception of oropharyngeal dysphagia and diminished quality of life. Following endoscopic treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum, significant improvement was demonstrated in the postoperative total SWAL-QOL score of 865 (406–1072) out of 1100 (p < 0.001). On the majority of subscales of SWAL-QOL there was significant improvement between pre- and postoperative scores. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first report in the literature on the changes in pre- and postoperative SWAL-QOL scores for patients with Zenker’s diverticulum before and after treatment. The results of this study indicate that endoscopic treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum leads to significant symptom relief as documented by significant changes in the majority of the SWAL-QOL domains.

Keywords

Pharyngeal pouch Dysphagia Symptom relief Questionnaire Deglutition Deglutition disorders 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    van Overbeek JJ. Meditation on the pathogenesis of hypopharyngeal (Zenker’s) diverticulum and a report of endoscopic treatment in 545 patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994;103(3):178–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ludlow A. A case of obstructed deglutition from a preternatural dilatation of and bag formed in the pharynx. Med Obs Inq. 1769;3:85–101.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zenker FA, von Ziemssen H. Dilatations of the esophagus. Cycl Pract Med. 1878;3:46–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McHorney CA, Bricker DE, Kramer AE, Rosenbek JC, Robbins J, Chignell KA, Logemann JA, Clarke C. The SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: I. Conceptual foundation and item development. Dysphagia. 2000;15(3):115–21. doi: 10.1007/s004550010012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McHorney CA, Bricker DE, Robbins J, Kramer AE, Rosenbek JC, Chignell KA. The SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: II. Item reduction and preliminary scaling. Dysphagia. 2000;15(3):122–33. doi: 10.1007/s004550010013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McHorney CA, Robbins J, Lomax K, Rosenbek JC, Chignell K, Kramer AE, Bricker DE. The SWAL-QOL and SWAL-CARE outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: III. Documentation of reliability and validity. Dysphagia. 2002;17(2):97–114. doi: 10.1007/s00455-001-0109-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vanderwegen J, Van Nuffelen G, De Bodt M. The validation and psychometric properties of the dutch version of the swallowing quality-of-life questionnaire (DSWAL-QOL). Dysphagia. 2012;. doi: 10.1007/s00455-012-9408-y.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bogaardt HC, Speyer R, Baijens LW, Fokkens WJ. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Dutch version of SWAL-QoL. Dysphagia. 2009;24(1):66–70. doi: 10.1007/s00455-008-9174-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Skaug HP, Geirdal AO, Brondbo K. Laser diverticulotomy for Zenker’s diverticulum–does it improve quality of life? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;270(9):2485–90. doi: 10.1007/s00405-013-2470-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Abel KM, Tombers NM, Krein KA, Moore EJ, Price DL, Kasperbauer JL, Hinni ML, Lott DG, Ekbom DC. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following transoral diverticulotomy for Zenker’s diverticulum: a prospective single-group study. Otolaryngol–head neck surgery. 2016;154(2):322–7. doi: 10.1177/0194599815616078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Belafsky PC, Mouadeb DA, Rees CJ, Pryor JC, Postma GN, Allen J, Leonard RJ. Validity and reliability of the eating assessment tool (EAT-10). Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2008;117(12):919–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Szczesniak MM, Maclean J, Zhang T, Liu R, Cook IJ. The normative range for and age and gender effects on the sydney swallow questionnaire (SSQ). Dysphagia. 2014;29(5):535–8. doi: 10.1007/s00455-014-9541-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Adam SI, Paskhover B, Sasaki CT. Laser versus stapler: outcomes in endoscopic repair of Zenker diverticulum. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(9):1961–6. doi: 10.1002/lary.23398.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Verhaegen VJ, Feuth T, van den Hoogen FJ, Marres HA, Takes RP. Endoscopic carbon dioxide laser diverticulostomy versus endoscopic staple-assisted diverticulostomy to treat Zenker’s diverticulum. Head Neck. 2011;33(2):154–9. doi: 10.1002/hed.21413.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nielsen HU, Trolle W, Rubek N, Homoe P. New technique using LigaSure for endoscopic mucomyotomy of Zenker’s diverticulum: diverticulotomy made easier. The Laryngoscope. 2014;124(9):2039–42. doi: 10.1002/lary.24558.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aly A, Devitt PG, Watson DI, Jamieson GG, Bessell JR, Chew A, Krishnan S. Endoscopic stapling for pharyngeal pouch: does it make the cut? ANZ J Surg. 2004;74(3):116–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miller FR, Bartley J, Otto RA. The endoscopic management of Zenker diverticulum: CO2 laser versus endoscopic stapling. Laryngoscope. 2006;116(9):1608–11. doi: 10.1097/01.mlg.0000233508.06499.41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thaler ER, Weber RS, Goldberg AN, Weinstein GS. Feasibility and outcome of endoscopic staple-assisted esophagodiverticulostomy for Zenker’s diverticulum. Laryngoscope. 2001;111(9):1506–8. doi: 10.1097/00005537-200109000-00002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sen P, Bhattacharyya AK. Endoscopic stapling of pharyngeal pouch. J laryngol otol. 2004;118(8):601–6. doi: 10.1258/0022215041917817.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chang CY, Payyapilli RJ, Scher RL. Endoscopic staple diverticulostomy for Zenker’s diverticulum: review of literature and experience in 159 consecutive cases. Laryngoscope. 2003;113(6):957–65. doi: 10.1097/00005537-200306000-00009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Colpaert
    • 1
    • 3
  • O. M. Vanderveken
    • 1
    • 3
  • K. Wouters
    • 2
    • 3
  • P. Van de Heyning
    • 1
    • 3
  • C. Van Laer
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck SurgeryAntwerp University HospitalEdegemBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Scientific Coordination and BiostatisticsAntwerp University HospitalEdegemBelgium
  3. 3.Faculty of Medicine and Health SciencesUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations