Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  260 / 412 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 260 / 412 Next Page
Page Background

samples from normophonic speakers. The authors strongly ad-

vised that caution should be used when determining the abnor-

mality of mucosal wave variations during clinical visualization

procedures. One concern in our study is that in 45.5% of the pa-

tients with histopathologically determined CIS, nonvibrating

segments were absent, which is a significant number.

Treatment involves removing the lesion with epithelium,

basal membrane, and lamina propria and, depending on the

type of cordectomy, deeper underlying structures. Vocal fold

scaring was examined on animal models. Rousseau et al

18,19

described the development of a vocal fold scar 6 months after

surgical injury in canine and rabbit models. As early as 2

months after the surgical removal of the epithelium and

lamina propria, no significant difference in collagen density

was noted, but at 6 months after injury, collagen density was

significantly increased in the surgically injured animals

compared with those with normal vocal folds. By 6 months,

the procollagen and elastin levels had achieved the densities

observed in normal vocal folds, although the elastin fibers

remain fragmented and disorganized. The basal layer of the

mucosal epithelium continues to experience remodeling in

the later stages of wound healing, whereas the intercellular

epithelial space undergoes remodeling earlier during the

acute stage of wound healing.

20

Kishimoto et al

21

investigated the maturation process of vo-

cal fold scarring after cordectomy in 10 patients (eight with

early laryngeal carcinoma and two with laryngeal dysplasia) us-

ing videostroboscopy. The patients were treated with cordec-

tomy types I–III. Improvements in amplitude of mucosal

wave were visible 6 months after the procedure and continued

to improve up to 14 months after the procedure. Twelve months

after the initial treatment was a reasonable time to assess the

treatment results in our study. Indeed, there were improvements

in phase symmetry, periodicity, amplitude of vocal fold vibra-

tions, and the regularity of mucosal wave. The number of pa-

tients with nonvibratory segment decreased. At the end of the

follow-up period, there were 23 (20.53%) patients with detected

nonvibrating segment. Four patients who developed invasive

carcinoma were among these patients. In other patients, this

result could be explained by the vocal fold scarring process,

particularly because in these patients, type II and type III cor-

dectomies were performed as a treatment of choice. This is

yet another limiting factor for stroboscopy use because it cannot

reliably distinguish the vocal fold process resulting from the ex-

istence of a nonvibrating segment.

Many voice disorders are marked by either aperiodicity or

fluctuating frequency and, therefore, cannot be visualized

with stroboscopy.

22

There are a growing number of articles

that emphasize the importance of different and more effective

methods in evaluating irregular vocal fold vibrations and the

propagation and existence of the mucosal wave, such as electro-

glottography, high-speed digital imaging, videokymography, or

digital kymography. Mucosal wave propagates in both vertical

and horizontal directions, and quantifying the vertical displace-

ment is crucial for understanding the effect of pathologies on

the mucosal wave. Stroboscopy, videokymography, and high-

speed digital imaging only provide a two-dimensional image

TABLE 6.

Multivariate Regression Analysis of Correlation of Dysplasia With Stroboscopic Signs and Type of Treatment

Cordectomy

Type

Glottic

Occlusion

Phase

Symmetry

Periodicity

Amplitude

Mucosal Wave Nonvibratory Segment

t

5.31

7.65

1.39

2.36

6.69

5.288

10.39

OR (95% CI) 1.22 (0.76 to 1.68) 1.88 (1.39 to 2.37) 0.80 ( 0.34 to 1.94) 1.24 (0.19 to 2.28) 2.03 (1.43 to 2.63) 1.68 (1.05 to 2.30) 2.950 (2.39 to 3.51)

Sig.

0.006*

0.791

0.076

0.265

0.474

0.636

0.000*

Abbreviations:

CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

*

P

< 0.05.

Vojko Djukic,

et al

Stroboscopy in Detection of Laryngeal Dysplasia

35