Material Parameters and ESEM Characterization of Functional ENT Prostheses During Ongoing Degradation

  • E.-J. Haberland
  • A. Berghaus
  • M. Füting
  • I. Bethge
  • W. Grellmann
Chapter
Part of the Engineering Materials book series (ENG.MAT.)

Abstract

Voice prostheses and tracheal prostheses are functional prostheses that are implanted to copy a natural function. Voice prostheses are implanted in patients who have had their larynx removed for medical reasons. With a voice prosthesis, fast voice rehabilitation is possible. The prosthesis generates the voice only indirectly. It makes possible an airflow that can cause vibrations of the entrance musculature and mucous membrane of the oesophagus. It is a pharyngo-tracheal shunt valve. Because of the overpressure in the trachea, air streams into the oesophagus or the low pharynx area. On the other hand, the passage of saliva and undigested food into the trachea from the oesophagus is prevented because of the valve effect. Perfect valve function is necessary for correct functioning: dysfunction necessitates a prosthesis change. There is a range of products on the market that differ mainly as far as the valve is concerned. The material of choice is silicone rubber. Polyurethane has also been tested as a material. Details of clinical use are given in [1–3].

Keywords

Silicone Rubber Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope Water Vapour Pressure Voice Prosthesis Valve Plate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    van den Hoogen F. J. A., Oudes M. J., Hombergen G., Nijdam H. F., Manni J. J. (1996): The Groningen, Nijdam and Provox voice prostheses: a prospective clinical comparison based on 845 replacements. Acta Otolaryngol. ( Stockh. ) 116: 119–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aust M. R., McCaffrey T. V. (1997): Early speech results with the provox prosthesis after laryngectomy. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 123 (9): 966–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Herrmann I. F. (Ed.) (1986): Speech Restoration via Voice Prostheses. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berghaus A. (1992): Eine neue Trachealprothese. Experimentelle und erste klinische Ergebnisse. Otorhinolaryngol. Nova 2: 232–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Haberland E.-J., Neumann G., Löbe L.-P., Voigt K. (1990): Stimmprothese. German Patent DD 275183 Al, Aktenzeichen WP A 61 F, January 17Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haberland E.-J., Grellmann W. (1996): Material-und Funktionskenngrößen von pharyngotrachealen Shuntventilen (‘Stimmprothesen’). In: Proceedings of Polymerwerkstoffe ’96, Merseburg, Germany, September 18–20: 252–255Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hopfe J.; Fitting M. (1995): Fundamentals and applications of environmental scanning electron microscopy. In: Wetzig K. (Ed.) In situ Scanning Electron Microscopy in Materials Research. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin: 219–240Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schön F. (1986): Physical aspects of tracheo-oesophageal shunt prosthesis. In: Herrmann I. F. (Ed.) Speech Restoration via Voice Prostheses. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg: 59–62Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Everaert E. P. J. M., Mahieu H. F., Wong Chung R. P., Verkerke G. J., van der Mei H. C., Busscher H. J. (1997): A new method for in vivo evaluation of biofilms on surface-modified silicone rubber voice prostheses. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 254: 261–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hilgers F. J. M., Balm A. J. M., Gregor R. T. (1995): Stimmrehabilitation nach Laryngektomie mit der Provox -Stimmprothese — Chirurgische und technische Aspekte. Teil I. HNO 43: 197–201Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hilgers F. J. M., Balm A. J. M., Gregor R. T. (1995): Stimmrehabilitation nach Laryngektomie mit der Provox®-Stimmprothese- Chirurgische und technische Aspekte. Teil II. HNO 43: 263–267Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Natarajan B., Richardson M. D., Path M. R. C., Irvine B. W. H., Thomas M. (1994): The Pro-vox voice prosthesis and Candida albicans growth: a preliminary report of clinical, mycological and scanning electron microscopic assessment. J. Laryngol. Otol. 108 (8): 666–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    de Carpentier J. P., Ryder W. D. J., Saeed S. R., Woolford T. J. (1996): Survival times of Provox valves. J. Laryng. Otol. 110 (1): 37–42Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • E.-J. Haberland
    • 1
  • A. Berghaus
    • 1
  • M. Füting
    • 1
  • I. Bethge
    • 2
  • W. Grellmann
    • 2
  1. 1.HalleGermany
  2. 2.MerseburgGermany

Personalised recommendations