Primary versus secondary tracheoesophageal puncture: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Related Articles

Primary versus secondary tracheoesophageal puncture: systematic review and meta-analysis.

J Laryngol Otol. 2018 Jan;132(1):14-21

Authors: Chakravarty PD, McMurran AEL, Banigo A, Shakeel M, Ah-See KW

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tracheoesophageal puncture represents the 'gold standard' for voice restoration following laryngectomy. Tracheoesophageal puncture can be undertaken primarily during laryngectomy or in a separate secondary procedure. There is no current consensus on which approach is superior. The current evidence comparing primary and secondary tracheoesophageal puncture was assessed.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of articles comparing outcomes for primary and secondary tracheoesophageal puncture after laryngectomy were conducted. Outcome measures were: voice success, overall complication rate and pharyngocutaneous fistula rate.
RESULTS: Eleven case series met the inclusion criteria, two prospective and nine retrospective. Meta-analysis did not demonstrate statistically significant differences in overall complication rate or voice outcomes, though it suggested a significantly increased risk of pharyngocutaneous fistula in primary compared to secondary tracheoesophageal puncture.
CONCLUSION: Primary tracheoesophageal puncture is a safe and efficient approach for voice rehabilitation. However, secondary tracheoesophageal puncture should be preferred where there is a higher risk of pharyngocutaneous fistula.

PMID: 29173195 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://ift.tt/2EWYetc