Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Current Treatment Options for Bilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis: A State-of-the-Art Review

Li Y., Garrett G., Zealear D.

Narrative Review on Scar, published in Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2017) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2017)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
28669149
PMCID
PMC5545703
DOI
10.21053/ceo.2017.00199
Citations
57

Abstract (original English)

Vocal fold paralysis (VFP) refers to neurological causes of reduced or absent movement of one or both vocal folds. Bilateral VFP (BVFP) is characterized by inspiratory dyspnea due to narrowing of the airway at the glottic level with both vocal folds assuming a paramedian position. The primary objective of intervention for BVFP is to relieve patients' dyspnea. Common clinical options for management include tracheostomy, arytenoidectomy and cordotomy. Other options that have been used with varying success include reinnervation techniques and botulinum toxin (Botox) injections into the vocal fold adductors. More recently, research has focused on neuromodulation, laryngeal pacing, gene therapy, and stem cell therapy. These newer approaches have the potential advantage of avoiding damage to the voicing mechanism of the larynx with an added goal of restoring some physiologic movement of the affected vocal folds. However, clinical data are scarce for these new treatment options (i.e., reinnervation and pacing), so more investigative work is needed. These areas of research are expected to provide dramatic improvements in the treatment of BVFP.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research