International Journal of Phonosurgery & Laryngology

Register      Login

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2019 ) > List of Articles


A Study of Rehabilitation of Speech in Post-laryngectomy Cases, as Seen in a Tertiary Care Institution of Esophageal Speech vs Speech with Tracheoesophageal Puncture Prosthesis

X Anton Dev, Somnath Saha

Keywords : Esophageal speech, Post-laryngectomy, Tracheoesophageal puncture prosthesis

Citation Information : Dev XA, Saha S. A Study of Rehabilitation of Speech in Post-laryngectomy Cases, as Seen in a Tertiary Care Institution of Esophageal Speech vs Speech with Tracheoesophageal Puncture Prosthesis. Int J Phonosurg Laryngol 2019; 9 (2):36-39.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10023-1170

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-08-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Aim: To assess the preference of the different modalities of post-laryngectomy speech rehabilitation in patients and review the outcome parameters of esophageal speech and tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) prosthesis modalities in comparison with the corresponding existing data. Materials and methods: A longitudinal prospective study conducted over a period of 1 year in the Department of ENT and Head-Neck Surgery in a tertiary care hospital. Patients of advanced laryngeal malignancies that were planned for total laryngectomy were included in this surgery. Based on the patients’ choice different modalities were adopted and the patients were followed up with regular training. Maximum takers were for esophageal speech followed by TE puncture and prosthesis insertion, and the outcomes in these two modalities were evaluated in detail. Six outcome parameters were assessed for the patients and consolidated. Then they were compared with the corresponding values obtained from previous studies to arrive at the results. Results: A total of ten cases of total laryngectomy was studied during the period of study. It was found that greater patient preference was for the TEP prosthesis modality. The mean frequency of phonation, mean intensity for vowels, and word production per minute in the TEP prosthesis were almost 80% of that seen in the esophageal prosthesis group. The most significant difference was in mean maximum phonation time which was only 37% of that seen in the TEP prosthesis group. Conclusion: In the present scenario until more advanced modalities of post-laryngectomy speech rehabilitation become more easily accessible to and affordable for the economically weaker sections of the society, esophageal speech modality is a dependable alternative. Further with proper training and follow-up, results with esophageal prosthesis are promising.

  1. Lefebvre JL. Surgery for laryngopharyngeal SCC in the era of organ preservation. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol [Internet] 2009;2(4):159–163. DOI: 10.3342/ceo.2009.2.4.159.
  2. Stankovic I, Milisavljevic M, Stankovic M. Survival after salvage total laryngectomy: the influence of previous treatment [Internet]. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2017;8:1–3.
  3. Ashan SF, Meleca RJ, Dworkin JP. Botulinum toxin injection of the cricopharyngeus muscle for the treatment of dysphagia. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122(5):691–695.
  4. Chao SS, Graham SM, Hoffman HT. Management of pharyngoesophageal spasm with botox. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2004;37(3):559–566. DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2004.01.003.
  5. Karen C, Joel M. Utilization of microprocessors in voice quality improvement: the electrolarynx. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck 2000;8:138–142. DOI: 10.1097/00020840-200006000-00002.
  6. Serafini I. Reconstructive laryngectomy. In: Shedd DP, Weinberg B. Surgical and prosthetic approach to speech rehabilitation. Boston: G.K. Hall; 1980. pp. 67–76.
  7. Guttman MR. Rehabilitation of voice in laryngectomized patients. Arch Otolaryngol 1932;15:478–479. DOI: 10.1001/archotol.1932.03570030496019.
  8. Singer ML, Blom PD, Hamaker RG. Voice rehabilitation after total laryngectomy. J Otolaryngol 1983;2:329–334.
  9. Van Weissenbruch R, Albers FW, Bouckaert S, et al. Deterioration of the provox silicone tracheo-esophageal voice prosthesis: microbial aspects and structural changes. Acta Otolaryngol 1997;117(3): 452–458. DOI: 10.3109/00016489709113420.
  10. Robbins J, Fisher HB, Blom EC, et al. A comparative acoustic study of normal, esophageal, and tracheoesophageal speech production. J Speech Hear Disord 1984;49(2):202–210. DOI: 10.1044/jshd.4902.202.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.