4.5 Article

Manometric assessment of pharyngeal swallowing pressure after mandibular reconstruction

Journal

EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY
Volume 268, Issue 6, Pages 941-944

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-011-1559-1

Keywords

Oral cancer patients; Mandibular bone partial resection; Swallowing function; Pharyngeal swallowing pressure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oral cancer patients who undergo mandibular bone partial resection often exhibit swallowing disturbance after surgery. We examined the usefulness of manometry in obtaining quantitative data on swallowing function in patients after mandibular bone partial resection. Postsurgical swallowing function was investigated, using a combination of videofluorography (VF) and manometry, in five patients with oral cancer, who underwent mandibular bone partial resection. Three patients underwent reconstruction of soft tissue defects only, while the remaining two patients underwent reconstruction of both soft tissue defects and a bony segment using a reconstruction plate or vascularized fibula with a skin paddle. Oropharyngeal swallowing pressure ranged from 61 to 82 mmHg compared to the normal range of 109 +/- 31 mmHg (mean +/- A SD). Partial resection of the mandible without reconstruction of the bony segment defect had a negative effect upon oropharyngeal swallowing pressure. Four of the five patients exhibited normal function in the oral stage. Elevation of the larynx was disturbed in 80% of the patients. None of the patients in this study experienced aspiration after surgery. In conclusion, a combination of VF and manometry revealed that mandibular bone partial resection resulted in disturbed elevation of the larynx while pharyngeal swallowing pressure decreases in those patients who do not undergo bony segment reconstruction. Our results suggested that the tongue, including the base of the tongue, should be set in a closed space so that pharyngeal swallowing pressure does not release.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available