Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Aerodynamic characteristics of the Provox low-resistance indwelling voice prosthesis

  • Originals
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The use of various prostheses for voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy has become widely accepted in recent years. Two different types of prostheses can be distinguished: non-indwelling devices, which can be removed and replaced by the patient, and indwelling voice prostheses, which have to be removed and replaced by a physician. In this report we describe the in vitro measurement of the airflow dynamics of the recently developed Provox low-resistance, indwelling voice prosthesis. Airflows used in these experiments varied from 0.05 to 0.4 1s−1. With increasing flows, the transdevice air pressure against airflow rates increased from 0.28 kPa to 1.36 kPa, while the mean airflow resistance decreased from 5.6 to 3.4 kPa 1−1 s−1. From these data and by comparison with data for other prostheses, the Provox voice prosthesis shows favorable airflow characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Annyas AA, Nijdam HF, Escajadillo JR, Mahieu HF, Leever H (1984) Groningen prosthesis for voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Clin Otolaryngol 9:51–54

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baugh F, Lewin JS, Baker SR (1990) Vocal rehabilitation of tracheoesophageal speech failures. Head Neck 12:69–73

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ben Jebria A, Henry C, Petit J, Gioux M, Devars F, Tressac L (1987) Physical and aerodynamic features of the Bordeaux voice prosthesis. Artif Organs 11: 383–387

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hilgers FJM, Balm AJM (1993) Long term results of vocal rehabilitation after total laryngectomy with the low-resistance, indwelling Provox™ voice prosthesis system. Clin Otolaryngol (in press)

  5. Hilgers FJM, Schouwenburg PIT (1990) A new low-resistance, self-retaining prosthesis (ProvoxTM) for voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy. Laryngoscope 100:1202–1207

    Google Scholar 

  6. Manni JJ, Broek P van den (1990) Surgical and prosthesis-related complications using the Groningen button voice prosthesis. Clin Otolaryngol 15:515–523

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nieboer GLJ, Schutte HK (1987) Aerodynamic properties of buttons and button-assisted oesophageal speech. In: Hermann IF (ed) Speech restoration via voice prostheses. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 87–91

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nieboer GLJ, Schutte HK (1987) The Groningen button: results of in vivo measurements. Rev Laryngol 108:121–122

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nijdam HF, Annyas AA, Schutte HK, Leever H (1982) A new prosthesis for voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy. Arch Otorhinolaryngol 237:27–33

    Google Scholar 

  10. Panje WR (1981) Prosthetic voice rehabilitation following laryngectomy: the voice button. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 90:116–120

    Google Scholar 

  11. Singer MI, Blom ED (1980) An endoscopic technique for restoration of voice after laryngectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 89:529–533

    Google Scholar 

  12. Singer MI, Blom ED (1981) Selective myotomy for voice restoration after total laryngectomy. Arch Otolaryngol 107:670–763

    Google Scholar 

  13. Singer MI, Blom ED, Hamaker RC (1986) Pharyngeal plexus neurectomy for alaryngeal speech rehabilitation. Laryngoscope 96:50–53

    Google Scholar 

  14. Smith BE (1986) Aerodynamic characteristics of Blom-Singer low-pressure vioce prostheses. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 112:50–52

    Google Scholar 

  15. Smitheran JR, Hixon TJ (1981) A clinical method for estimating laryngeal airway resistance during vowel production. J Speech Hear Dis 46:138–146

    Google Scholar 

  16. Weinberg B (1982) Airway resistance of the voice button. Arch Otolaryngol 108:498–500

    Google Scholar 

  17. Weinberg B, Moon J (1984) Aerodynamic properties of four tracheoesophageal puncture prostheses. Arch Otolaryngol 110: 673–675

    Google Scholar 

  18. Weinberg B, Moon JB (1986) Airway resistances of Blom-Singer and Panje low-pressure tracheoesophageal puncture prostheses. J Speech Hear Disord 51:169–172

    Google Scholar 

  19. Williams SE, Watson JB (1987) Speaking proficiency variations according to method of alaryngeal voicing. Laryngoscope 97:737–739

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zijlstra RJ, Mahieu HF, Lith-Bijl JT van, Schutte HK (1991) Aerodynamic properties of the low-resistance Groningen button. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:657–661

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute (Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Huis), Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    F. J. M. Hilgers, M. W. Cornelissen & A. J. M. Balm

Authors
  1. F. J. M. Hilgers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. W. Cornelissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. J. M. Balm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hilgers, F.J.M., Cornelissen, M.W. & Balm, A.J.M. Aerodynamic characteristics of the Provox low-resistance indwelling voice prosthesis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 250, 375–378 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00180379

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00180379

Key words

Search

Navigation