Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 266, Issue 11, pp 1687–1698 | Cite as

Speech and swallowing after surgical treatment of advanced oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review of the literature

  • Anne Marijn Kreeft
  • Lisette van der Molen
  • Frans J. Hilgers
  • Alfons J. BalmEmail author
Review Article

Abstract

Purpose of this review is the evaluation of speech and swallowing function after surgical treatment for advanced oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma. A systematic literature search (1993–2009), yielding 1,220 hits. The predefined criteria for inclusion in this systematic review were oral or oropharyngeal cancer, surgical treatment, speech and/or swallow function outcome, T-stage ≥ 2, patient cohort > 20, adequate description of the patient cohort in terms of tumor (sub) site, and low risk of bias (Cochrane criteria). Twelve studies fulfilled the predefined criteria. The results for speech more than 1 year after resection of oral or oropharyngeal cancer are reported to be moderate to good; although in the majority of patients speech is experienced as deviant. Overall sentence intelligibility scores are normal (92–98%). Swallowing is reported to be often already disturbed before treatment and is even more severely compromised after treatment. Aspiration rates of liquids vary from 12 to 50% and especially after oropharyngeal resection, pharyngeal transit times are delayed. Postoperative radiotherapy further increases function disturbances significantly. Critical subsites with regard to speech are the mobile tongue, and the soft palate and for swallowing, the floor of the mouth, the posterior base of tongue and the hard and soft palate. Prosthetic appliances (e.g., obturators, palatal augmentation prostheses) can diminish function losses considerably. Surgery for oral and oropharyngeal cancer yields function deficits, most notably with regard to swallowing. Series are small and outcome measurements vary. Therefore, to optimize pre-operative risk assessment, there is a need for internationally standardized outcome measurements.

Keywords

Speech Swallowing Oral and oropharyngeal carcinoma Surgery 

Notes

Conflict of interest statement

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Morton RP (2003) Studies in the quality of life of head and neck cancer patients: results of a two-year longitudinal study and a comparative cross-sectional cross-cultural survey. Laryngoscope 113:1091–1103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pauloski BR, Logemann JA, Rademaker AW et al (1994) Speech and swallowing function after oral and oropharyngeal resections: one-year follow-up. Head Neck 16:313–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Perlmutter MA, Johnson JT, Snyderman CH, Cano ER, Myers EN (2002) Functional outcomes after treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the base of the tongue. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128:887–891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tschudi D, Stoeckli S, Schmid S (2003) Quality of life after different treatment modalities for carcinoma of the oropharynx. Laryngoscope 113:1949–1954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kreeft A, Tan IB, van den Brekel MWM, Hilgers FJ, Balm AJM (2009) The surgical dilemma of ‘functional inoperability’: current consensus on operability with regard to functional results. Clin Otolaryngol 34:140–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rogers S, Ahad SA, Murphy AP (2007) A structured review and theme analysis of papers published on “quality of life” in head and neck cancer: 2000–2005. Oral Oncol 43:843–868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Higgins JPT, Altman DG (2008) Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). The Cochrane Collaboration. Available at http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
  8. 8.
    Mlynarek AM, Rieger JM, Harris JR et al (2008) Methods of functional outcomes assessment following treatment of oral and oropharyngeal cancer: review of the literature. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 37:2–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borggreven PA, Verdonck-De Leeuw I, Langendijk JA et al (2005) Speech outcome after surgical treatment for oral and oropharyngeal cancer: a longitudinal assessment of patients reconstructed by a microvascular flap. Head Neck 27:785–793PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rieger JM, Zalmanowitz JG, Li SY et al (2007) Functional outcomes after surgical reconstruction of the base of tongue using the radial forearm free flap in patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. Head Neck 29:1024–1032PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bohle G III, Rieger J, Huryn J, Verbel D, Hwang F, Zlotolow I (2005) Efficacy of speech aid prostheses for acquired defects of the soft palate and velopharyngeal inadequacy—clinical assessments and cephalometric analysis: a memorial Sloan-Kettering study. Head Neck 27:195–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Carvalho-Teles V, Sennes LU, Gielow I (2008) Speech evaluation after palatal augmentation in patients undergoing glossectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 134:1066–1070PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Furia CLB, Kowalski LP, Latorre MRDO et al (2001) Speech intelligibility after glossectomy and speech rehabilitation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 127:877–883PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rieger JM, Zalmanowitz JG, Li SY et al (2008) Speech outcomes after soft palate reconstruction with the soft palate insufficiency repair procedure. Head Neck 30:1439–1444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chien CY, Su CY, Hwang CF, Chuang HC, Jeng SF, Chen YC (2006) Ablation of advanced tongue or base of tongue cancer and reconstruction with free flap: functional outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol 32:353–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borggreven PA, Leeuw IV, Rinkel RN et al (2007) Swallowing after major surgery of the oral cavity or oropharynx: a prospective and longitudinal assessment of patients treated by microvascular soft tissue reconstruction. Head Neck 29:638–647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tei K, Maekawa K, Kitada H, Ohiro Y, Yamazaki Y, Totsuka Y (2007) Recovery from postsurgical swallowing dysfunction in patients with oral cancer. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 65:1077–1083PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pauloski BR, Logemann JA, Colangelo LA et al (1998) Surgical variables affecting speech in treated patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Laryngoscope 108:908–916PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zuydam AC, Lowe D, Brown JS, Vaughan ED, Rogers SN (2005) Predictors of speech and swallowing function following primary surgery for oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Clin Otolaryngol 30:428–437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rogers SN, Scott J, Chakrabati A, Lowe D (2008) The patients’ account of outcome following primary surgery for oral and oropharyngeal cancer using a ‘quality of life’ questionnaire. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 17:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schoen PJ, Raghoebar GM, Bouma J et al (2008) Prosthodontic rehabilitation of oral function in head–neck cancer patients with dental implants placed simultaneously during ablative tumour surgery: an assessment of treatment outcomes and quality of life. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37:8–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Markkanen-Leppanen M, Isotalo E, Makitie AA et al (2006) Changes in articulatory proficiency following microvascular reconstruction in oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Oral Oncol 42:646–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rieger J, Dickson N, Lemire R et al (2006) Social perception of speech in individuals with oropharyngeal reconstruction. J Psychosoc Oncol 24:33–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van der Molen L, van Rossum MA, Burkhead LM, Smeele LE, Hilgers FJ (2008) Functional outcomes and rehabilitation strategies in patients treated with chemoradiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer: a systematic review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 266:889–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kotz T, Costello R, Li Y, Posner MR (2007) Swallowing dysfunction after chemoradiation for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Head Neck 26:365–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ackerstaff AH, Tan IB, Rasch CR et al (2002) Quality-of-life assessment after supradose selective intra-arterial cisplatin and concomitant radiation (RADPLAT) for inoperable stage IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128:1185–1190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Balm AJ, Schornagel JH, Rasch CR (2005) The role of simultaneous chemotherapy and radiotherapy in the treatment of locally metastasised tumours of the larynx, pharynx and oral cavity. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 149:61–64 (article in Dutch)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hanna E, Alexiou M, Morgan J et al (2004) Intensive chemoradiotherapy as a primary treatment for organ preservation in patients with advanced cancer of the head and neck: efficacy, toxic effects, and limitations. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130:861–867PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Deleyiannis FW, Weymuller EA Jr, Coltrera MD (1997) Quality of life of disease-free survivors of advanced (stage III or IV) oropharyngeal cancer. Head Neck 19:466–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Offringa M, Assendelft WJJ, Scholten RJPM (eds) (2003) Chapter 6: Guidelines: In: Introduction to evidence based medicine, 2nd edn. Bohn StaXeu Van Loghum, Houten, The Netherlands, pp 152–162Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Borggreven PA, Aaronson NK, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM et al (2007) Quality of life after surgical treatment for oral and oropharyngeal cancer: a prospective longitudinal assessment of patients reconstructed by a microvascular flap. Oral Oncol 43:1034–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rogers SN, Lowe D, Brown JS, Vaughan ED (1999) The University of Washington head and neck cancer measure as a predictor of outcome following primary surgery for oral cancer. Head Neck 21:394–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hassanein KAA, Musgrove BT, Bradbury E (2001) Functional status of patients with oral cancer and its relation to style of coping, social support and psychological status. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 39:340–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Deleyiannis FW, Weymuller EA Jr, Coltrera MD, Futran N (1999) Quality of life after laryngectomy: are functional disabilities important? Head Neck 21:319–324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rogers SN, Lowe D, Fisher SE, Brown JS, Vaughan ED (2002) Health-related quality of life and clinical function after primary surgery for oral cancer. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:11–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Op de Coul BM, Ackerstaff AH, van As CJ et al (2005) Quality of life assessment in laryngectomized individuals: do we need additions to standard questionnaires in specific clinical research projects? Clin Otolaryngol 30:169–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Marijn Kreeft
    • 1
  • Lisette van der Molen
    • 1
  • Frans J. Hilgers
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Alfons J. Balm
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Head and Neck Surgery and OncologyThe Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Institute of Phonetic Sciences/Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication (ACLC)University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Academic Medical CenterUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations