Injection of Botulinum Toxin into External Laryngeal Muscles in Pediatric Laryngeal Paralysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: I undertook to demonstrate the effect of injecting botulinum toxin type A (BTA) into cricothyroid, sternothyroid, and sternohyoid muscles in cases of bilateral laryngeal paralysis (BLP). Tracheostomy remains the consistently reproducible and accepted method to salvage the airway obstruction in BLP. The bypass, however, acknowledges the current lack of knowledge and consensus on the pathogenesis. METHODS: I performed a retrospective chart review of BLP cases treated with BTA in a tertiary care pediatric center. The injections were performed under direct vision through an open transcervical approach. The main outcome measures used were improvement of airway symptoms and endoscopic findings, tracheostomy requirement, and incidence of recovery of function. RESULTS: In total, 24 patients with BLP were identified. Over a 2-year period, 7 patients were treated with BTA. Six patients had congenital idiopathic BLP. One of these had trisomy 7. One patient acquired the paralysis after cardiac surgery. No patients required a tracheostomy, except for the infant with trisomy 7. Six patients recovered function completely, and the seventh recovered it partially (range, 4 weeks to 12 months). CONCLUSIONS: Injection of BTA into external laryngeal muscles may be an alternative to tracheostomy in BLP. It is proposed that the toxin relaxes the glottic aperture by paralyzing the cricothyroid and strap muscles and that it may aid in appropriate reinnervation of the larynx via mechanisms beyond the neuromuscular junction.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".