Patient-Reported Outcomes after False Vocal Folds Injections for Adductor Spasmodic Dysphonia

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

6-4-2024

Publication Title

Journal of Voice

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to investigate if false vocal folds (FVF) or simultaneous FVF with thyroarytenoid (FVF + TA) Botox® injections achieve comparable treatment effects to standard TA injections. This study also aims to determine how patient-reported outcomes contribute to the transition to, and continuation of, FVF or FVF + TA injections. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for all patients receiving Botox® for adductor spasmodic dysphonia at a laryngology practice between 2005 and 2018. Twenty out of 103 patients met the study's inclusion criteria. All subjects began standard treatment with TA injections. Based on response to injection, patients either continued to receive TA injections (group TA; n = 7), switched to FVF injections (group FVF; n = 7), or switched to FVF + TA injections (group FVF + TA; n = 6). A comparison of group means before and after initiation of FVF ± TA injections was performed between groups FVF and FVF + TA to group TA for the injection dosage, the duration of injection cycles, the patient-reported duration of best voice, and the presence and duration of breathiness and choking. Within-group observations were also compared before and after FVF ± TA injections. Results: There were no significant findings for the variables between group FVF and group TA before FVF injections. The duration of injection cycles was significantly shorter for group FVF than group TA after FVF injections (95% CI: − 66.05, − 0.34; P = 0.05). However, duration of best voice quality, breathiness, and choking were similar (P > 0.05) for group FVF to group TA after FVF injections. Group FVF + TA had a significantly shorter duration of injection cycles (95% CI: − 66.97, − 3.22; P = 0.03), best voice (95% CI: − 0.76, − 0.03; P = 0.04), and choking (95% CI: − 2.68, 0.02; P = 0.05) than group TA before FVF + TA injections. Group FVF + TA displayed a similar duration (P > 0.05) of injection cycles, best voice quality, breathiness, and choking to group TA after FVF + TA injections. Within-group, increased duration of injection cycles and best voice were observed after FVF ± TA injections for both group FVF and FVF + TA. Acute adverse events were variable within groups after FVF ± TA injections. Conclusion: This study compared outcomes of FVF or FVF + TA injections to successive TA injections among patients. FVF injections displayed similar duration of best voice quality, breathiness, and choking to TA injections. FVF + TA injections achieved similar duration of injection cycles, best voice quality, breathiness, and choking to TA injections. This study demonstrates that patients guided by a reduced duration of adverse events, while tolerating a shorter injection cycle, may benefit from initiation and continuation of FVF injections. Patients guided by increased duration of injection cycle and best voice, while tolerating the duration of adverse events, may benefit from initiation and continuation of FVF + TA injections.

PubMed ID

38839465

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS