Our Summary
This research is about a procedure called tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP), which is commonly used to restore speech in patients who’ve had their larynx (voice box) removed. The study aimed to determine whether it’s better to perform this procedure at the same time as the larynx removal (primary TEP), or later on (secondary TEP), in terms of success and complications.
The authors reviewed previous studies on this topic. They found that the success rates varied across studies and were measured differently. Two studies showed that primary TEP had better results, while nine found no difference between the two methods. The studies also looked at complications relating to the TEP itself, infection, and narrowing of the throat. Except for one study, which reported more complications in primary TEP patients who had their larynx removed again, there was no difference between the two methods.
The review concludes that there’s no strong evidence to suggest that primary TEP has worse results than secondary TEP. The authors recommend a well-designed experiment to properly answer this question.
FAQs
- What is the tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) procedure and why is it used?
- What is the difference between primary and secondary TEP?
- Did the research find a significant difference in success rates or complications between primary and secondary TEP?
Doctor’s Tip
A doctor might tell a patient undergoing a laryngectomy that the timing of a tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) procedure, either done at the same time as the larynx removal (primary TEP) or later on (secondary TEP), does not seem to significantly impact success or complications. It’s important to discuss the options with your healthcare provider and make an informed decision based on your individual circumstances.
Suitable For
Patients who have had their larynx removed (laryngectomy) due to conditions such as laryngeal cancer are typically recommended for tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) to restore speech. The decision to undergo primary TEP (at the same time as laryngectomy) or secondary TEP (at a later time) depends on various factors such as individual patient characteristics, medical history, and surgeon’s recommendation.
Timeline
Before laryngectomy:
- Patient is diagnosed with a condition that requires removal of the larynx, such as cancer.
- Patient undergoes pre-operative assessments and consultations with their healthcare team.
- Patient may undergo other treatments such as radiation or chemotherapy before the surgery.
- Surgery is scheduled and patient prepares for the procedure.
After laryngectomy:
- Patient undergoes surgery to remove the larynx, typically under general anesthesia.
- Patient stays in the hospital for a period of time to recover and receive post-operative care.
- Patient may undergo rehabilitation and speech therapy to learn new ways of speaking after the surgery.
- Patient may be fitted with a tracheoesophageal prosthesis (TEP) to help restore speech.
- Patient continues to follow up with their healthcare team for long-term monitoring and care.
What to Ask Your Doctor
Some questions a patient should ask their doctor about laryngectomy and tracheoesophageal puncture (TEP) include:
- What are the potential benefits of undergoing a primary TEP versus a secondary TEP?
- What are the potential risks and complications associated with both procedures?
- How will my ability to speak be affected by undergoing a laryngectomy and TEP?
- What is the success rate of TEP in restoring speech after a laryngectomy?
- How soon after the laryngectomy can TEP be performed?
- What is the recovery process like after undergoing TEP?
- Are there any lifestyle changes or adjustments I need to make after undergoing TEP?
- How often will I need to see my doctor for follow-up appointments after TEP?
- Are there any alternative treatments or technologies available for restoring speech after a laryngectomy?
- Can you provide me with more information or resources about laryngectomy and TEP?
Reference
Authors: Luu K, Chang BA, Valenzuela D, Anderson D. Journal: Clin Otolaryngol. 2018 Oct;43(5):1250-1259. doi: 10.1111/coa.13138. Epub 2018 May 31. PMID: 29770614