European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology · 2013 · 48 citations · 21 references
MedicineSpeech-language PathologyLaryngologyProsthetic Implant RehabilitationProstheticsPrognosis AssessmentProsthetic DevicesVoice SurgeryLaryngeal Prosthetic DevicesLifetimesMaterial LifetimeProsthesis Longevity PredictionProsthetic LongevitySpeech Outcomes With ProsthesesSpeech ProsthesesSpeech Rehabilitation With Prostheses
The aim of the study was to compare device life of more recent indwelling voice prostheses Provox Vega and Blom-Singer Dual Valve to device life of well-known standard devices (Provox 2, Blom-Singer Classic). In a prospective, non-randomised study, device life of Blom-Singer Classic, Blom-Singer Dual Valve, Provox2, Provox Vega and Provox ActiValve voice prostheses was recorded in a group of 102 laryngectomised patients. In total 749 voice prosthesis were included. Average overall life time was 108 days, median 74 days. The prosthesis with the longest dwell time was the Provox ActiValve (median 291 days). Provox Vega had longer device life compared with Provox2 (median 92 days vs 66 days; p = 0.006) and compared with Blom-Singer Classic (median 92 days vs 69 days; p = 0.004). In conclusion, device lifetimes of Provox Vega and ActiValve were better than those of Provox2 and the Blom-Singer Classic. New voice prostheses, with a defined valve opening pressure (Provox Vega, Provox ActiValve, Blom-Singer Dual Valve) had longer lifetimes than prostheses without a defined opening pressure (Blom-Singer Classic and Provox 2).
21
A new prosthesis for voice rehabilitation after laryngectomy
H. F. Nijdam, A. A. Annyas, H.K. Schutte et al. · European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology · 1982 · 116 citations
Medicine, Otolaryngology, Surgery +14
Frans J. M. Hilgers, Annemieke H. Ackerstaff, Alfons J. M. Balm et al. · Acta Oto-Laryngologica · 1997 · 97 citations