4.1 Article

F03 Injection of basic fibroblast growth factor for unilateral vocal cord paralysis

Journal

ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA
Volume 137, Issue 9, Pages 962-967

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00016489.2017.1314550

Keywords

Basic fibroblast growth factor; office procedure; regenerative medicine; laryngeal framework surgery; phonological outcome; injection therapy

Funding

  1. Tokyo Voice Center and Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, School of Medicine, Jichi Medical University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Unilateral vocal cord paralysis (UVCP) not only induces severe dysphonia, but aspiration as well. Although laryngeal framework surgery is usually performed to treat this condition, the procedure is not tolerated by some patients. In the previous study, basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) injections for vocal cord scarring and sulcus have been reported to provide favorable outcomes while being minimally invasive. In this study, the authors retrospectively investigated phonological outcomes after bFGF injection in patients with UVCP. Methods: This study was registered in University hospital Medical Information Network - Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000019347). Nineteen patients with unilateral cord paralysis were treated with bFGF injection. The treatment regimen involved a single injection of 50g of bFGF into the muscle layer. More than six months after the injection, aerodynamic and acoustic outcomes were examined. Results: The voice handicap index, maximum phonation time, mean airflow rate, and pitch range improved significantly after injection of bFGF. No sex-related differences were observed in any phonological parameter. Conclusion: bFGF injection, an easy method and suitable as an office procedure, significantly improved the hoarseness caused by UVCP. It is expected to be widely adopted and effective adjunctive drugs, and procedures are anticipated to be developed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available