Vocal Fold Injection Augmentation for Post-Airway Reconstruction Dysphonia: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Post airway reconstruction dysphonia (PARD) is common and has a significant effect on the quality of life of patients. Vocal fold injection augmentation (VFIA) is one treatment that can be used to improve glottic insufficiency in some patients. The goal of this study was to characterize the use and outcomes of VFIA for PARD. Methods: Retrospective chart review from January 2007 to July 2018 at a tertiary pediatric care center. Consecutive patients with PARD who underwent VFIA, who had a preoperative voice evaluation and a follow-up evaluation within 3 months after VFIA (fat, carboxymethylcellulose gel, hyaluronic acid). Results: Thirty-four patients (20 female) underwent VFIA. The mean age at the time of the injection was 13.6 years (SD 6.1). Twenty patients (58.8%) had a history of prematurity and a mean of 1.8 open airway surgeries. After injection, 29/34 patients (85.3%) noted a subjective voice improvement. The baseline Consensus Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) overall severity score decreased by a mean of 5.7 (SD = 19.6) points, P = .12. Total pediatric Voice Handicap Index (pVHI) improved by 6.0 (SD = 19.5) points, from 57.4 (SD = 20.0) to 51.4 (SD = 17.2), P = .09. Functional pVHI subscore demonstrated a significant improvement, with a decrease of 3.4 (SD = 7.3) points, P = .02. All procedures were performed as an overnight observation and no complication occurred. Conclusion: Patients with PARD represent a complex subset of patients. VFIA is a straightforward intervention that may improve voice perception. Many patients reported subjective improvement despite minimal objective measurement. Further work is warranted to elucidate the role of injection in management of PARD
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".