4.0 Article Proceedings Paper

Flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing: Patient characteristics and analysis of safety in 1,340 consecutive examinations

期刊

ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY
卷 114, 期 3, 页码 173-176

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/000348940511400301

关键词

deglutition; endoscopy; FEESST; safety; swallowing

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST) is a comprehensive endoscopic assessment of the sensory and motor components of a swallow. Previous studies addressing patient safety issues with respect to FEESST included relatively small numbers of patients and paid almost no attention to patient characteristics. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of FEESST-related complications in the outpatient and inpatient settings and to analyze patient diagnoses that led to the performance of FEESST. We performed a prospective study of FEESST complications in 1,340 consecutive evaluations performed over a 41/2-year period. The primary outcome variables were incidence of epistaxis and airway compromise. The secondary outcome variable was underlying patient diagnoses. The incidence of epistaxis was 1 in 1,340 (0.07%). There were no instances of airway compromise. Stroke was the most common reason for the performance of FEESST (343; 25.6%), followed by cardiac-related dysphagia (298; 22.2%) following open heart surgery (169/298; 56.7%), heart attack, congestive heart failure, or new arrhythmia. The remaining causes were head and neck cancer (207; 15.4%), pulmonary disease (141; 10.5%), chronic neurologic disease (124; 9.3%), and acid reflux disease (80; 6.0%). We conclude that FEESST is a relatively safe procedure for the sensory and motor assessment of dysphagia in a cohort of patients with a wide variety of underlying diagnoses. The emergence of cardiac surgery as a common cause of dysphagia warrants further study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据