Revision Gore-Tex medialization laryngoplasty

Jacob T. Cohen, Dwight D. Bates, Gregory N. Postma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the indications, results, and safety of revision Gore-Tex medialization laryngoplasty (GML). Methods A retrospective chart review of 156 patients that underwent GML procedures between the years 1998-2002. Study population consisted of those patients who required revision surgery for any reason. Results Sixteen patients required 22 revision procedures. Indications for revision were divided into 2 groups, complications and glottal closure problems. Complications included extruded or displaced implants (n = 4). The most common glottal closure problem was undercorrection (n = 9). Others included anterior overcorrection (n = 1) and persistent posterior glottal gap (n = 2). Revision procedures included GML (n = 9), injection augmentation (n = 9), endoscopic implant removal (n = 2), and arytenoid adduction (n = 2). In patients with glottal closure problems, the GCI improved in all 10 and the voice rating scale improved in 9. Conclusion Reasons for revision of GML are variable, the most common being undercorrection. A variety of safe, effective revision techniques are available with a high success rate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)236-240
Number of pages5
JournalOtolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Volume131
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2004
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Revision Gore-Tex medialization laryngoplasty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this