Dysphonia After Laryngotracheal Reconstruction

  • Mathieu Bergeron
  • Lyndy J. Wilcox
  • Alessandro de AlarconEmail author


The main objective of airway reconstruction is to establish a patent laryngeal airway without the need of a tracheostomy tube as well as being able to support respiration, airway protection, and voicing (Kelchner et al. Pediatric voice: a modern, collaborative approach to care. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014). To achieve these goals, several surgical techniques may be used to either expand the airway diameter, remove the stenosed segment, or slide the airway. The most common airway expansion procedure is laryngotracheoplasty (LTP) with anterior and/or posterior costal cartilage grafts, while the most common resection procedure is cricotracheal resection (CTR). Slide tracheoplasty improves the airway diameter by sliding one segment of the airway onto the other, effectively doubling the size of the slid section. Each of these procedures has its advantages and disadvantages regarding surgical correction of the stenotic airway. Similarly, these techniques, as well as the initial airway injury, impact voice outcome to different degrees.


Dysphonia after laryngotracheal reconstruction Laryngotracheal reconstruction dysphonia Airway reconstruction Laryngotracheoplasty Slide tracheoplasty Cricotracheal resection 


  1. 1.
    Kelchner LN, Brehm SB, Weinrich BD. Pediatric voice: a modern, collaborative approach to care. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zacharias S, Kelchner LN, Creaghead N. Teachers’ perceptions of adolescent females with voice disorders. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2013;44:174–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Alarcon A. Voice outcomes after pediatric airway reconstruction. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(Suppl 4):S84–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zacharias SR, Myer CM 4th, Meinzen-Derr J, Kelchner L, Deliyski DD, de Alarcón A. Comparison of videostroboscopy and high-speed videoendoscopy in evaluation of supraglottic phonation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2016;125(10):829–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rutter MJ, Link DT, Hartley BE, Cotton RT. Arytenoid prolapse as a consequence of cricotracheal resection in children. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2001;110(3):210–4. PubMed ID: 11269763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Houlton JJ, de Alarcon A, Johnson K, et al. Voice outcomes following adults cricotracheal resection. Laryngoscope. 2011;121(9):1910–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stewart AJ, Butler CR, Muthialu N. Swallowing outcomes in children after slide tracheoplasty. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;108:85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bailey CM, Clary RA, Pengilly A, Albert DM. Voice quality following laryngotracheal reconstruction. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1995;32. Supple:S93–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zalzal GH, Loomis SR, Fisher M. Laryngeal reconstruction in children. Assessment of vocal quality. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119(5):504–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith ME, Marsh JH, Cotton RT, Myer CM 3rd. Voice problems after pediatric laryngotracheal reconstruction: videolaryngostroboscopic, acoustic, and perceptual assessment. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1993;25(1–3):173–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kelchner LN, Weinrich B, Brehm SM, Tabangin ME, de Alarcon A. Characterization of supraglottic phonation in children after airway reconstruction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2010;119(6):383–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bergeron M, de Alarcon A, Hart CK, Rutter MJ. Factors associated with epiglottic petiole prolapse repositioning success. Laryngoscope. 2018. [epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bergeron M, de Alarcon A, Hart CK, Rutter MJ. Outcomes of prophylactic epiglottic petiole suspension at the time of complete laryngofissure. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019. [epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krival K, Kelchner LN, Weinrich B, Baker SE, Lee L, Middendorf JH, Zur KB. Vibratory source, vocal quality and fundamental frequency following pediatric laryngotracheal reconstruction. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2007;71(8):1261–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Connor NP, Cohen SB, Theis SM, Thibeault SL, Heatley DG, Bless DM. Attitudes of children with dysphonia. J Voice: Off J Voice Found. 2008;22(2):197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bergeron M, Kelchner L, Weinrich B, et al. Influence of preoperative voice assessment on treatment plan prior to airway surgery. Laryngoscope. 2018;128(12):2858–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zur KB, Cotton S, Kelchner L, Baker S, Weinrich B, Lee L. Pediatric voice handicap index (pVHI): a new tool for evaluating pediatric dysphonia. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol Ireland. 2007;71:77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boseley ME, Cunningham MJ, Volk MS, Hartnick CJ. Validation of the pediatric voice-related quality-of-life survey. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 132. United States2006:717–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hirano M. Clinical examination of voice. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1981.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    American Speech Language and Hearing Association (ASHA). CAPE-V procedures and form. Available from:
  21. 21.
    de Alarcon A, Brehm SB, Kelchner LN, Meinzen-Derr J, Middendorf J, Weinrich B. Comparison of pediatric voice handicap index scores with perceptual voice analysis in patients following airway reconstruction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2009;118(8):581–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brehm SB, Weinrich B, Zieser M, Kelchner L, Middendorf J, Elluru R, de Alarcon A. Aerodynamic and acoustic assessment in children following airway reconstruction: an assessment of feasibility. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;73(7):1019–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zeitels SM, de Alarcon A, Burns JA, Lopez-Guerra G, Hillman RE. Posterior glottic diastasis: mechanically deceptive and often overlooked. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2011;120(2):71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Helman SN, Karle W, Pitman MJ. Management of posterior glottal insufficiency with use of a buccal graft. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2017;126(2):159–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sidell DR, Zacharias S, Balakrishnan K, Rutter MJ, de Alarcón A. Surgical management of posterior glottic diastasis in children. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2015;124(1):72–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bergeron M, Fleck RJ, Middlebrook C, et al. Preliminary assessment of dynamic voice CT in post-airway reconstruction patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;159(3):516–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bergeron M, Fleck RJ, Zacharias S, Tabangin M, de Alarcón A. The value of dynamic voice CT scan for complex airway patients undergoing voice surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019 [under review].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mathieu Bergeron
    • 1
  • Lyndy J. Wilcox
    • 2
  • Alessandro de Alarcon
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Pediatric OtolaryngologyCHU Ste-Justine Pediatric HospitalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Division of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck SurgeryVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck SurgeryCincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations