Alessandro de Alarcon · Factors associated with epiglottic petiole prolapse repositioning success
Follow
Article1 min read·Published Dec 2019Older

Factors associated with epiglottic petiole prolapse repositioning success

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov shows its articles on its own site.

Read the article on pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ↗

Article · Dec 2019 · 1 min read

In brief

In brief

Retrospective study of 59 pediatric patients identifies pre-epiglottic fat debulking as the key factor preventing recurrent epiglottic petiole prolapse after repositioning surgery. Most patients had prior laryngofissure procedures, with one-third experiencing persistent prolapse despite intervention.

Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.

Alessandro de Alarcon

Objective: Epiglottic petiole prolapse is an overlooked entity that could lead to supraglottic airway obstruction for patients with complex airway history. Classical symptoms include exercise intolerance, obstructive sleep apnea, and difficulty with decannulation. The goal of this project was to evaluate the factors associated with epiglottic petiole repositioning success. Methods: Retrospective case series of patients with a complex history of airway reconstruction evaluated by the aerodigestive team at a tertiary pediatric hospital from May 2003 to August 2017. All patients underwent repositioning for petiole prolapse. Results: We had a total of 59 patients (14 females, 23.7%) with complex airway anomalies with petiole prolapse noted during a microlaryngoscopy and bronchoscopy. Mean age was 12.9 ± 6.1 year old (range 1.3-35.9). Patients had a history of 2.2 (1-5) open airway surgeries, and 51 of 58 (87.9%) of them had a prior complete laryngofissure. Laryngotracheoplasty and petiole repositioning were performed as a double-stage surgery for 54 of 58 (91.5%) patients. Epiglottic petiole prolapse was persistent in 20 patients (33.9%) and became symptomatic for 14 of them (23.7%). The main preventive factor of petiole prolapse recurrence was pre-epiglottic fat debulking at the time of the repositioning, with an odds ratio of 0.06 (95% confidence interval 0.007-0.6, P = 0.01). Stent placement, longer duration of stent placement, and double-stage procedure also increased the lik

Read it at the source ↗

Try
Intelligent Search· scoped to this article · not medical adviceSearch the whole library →
Only a few other public items share this field — go deeper there →