Anterolateral advancement pharyngoplasty versus barbed reposition pharyngoplasty in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

OBJECTIVES: To compare functional outcomes and complication rates of anterolateral advancement pharyngoplasty (ALA) versus barbed reposition pharyngoplasty (BRP) in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea patients with palatal and lateral pharyngeal wall collapse. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: University hospitals. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-six patients were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups randomly, group 1 (23 cases) underwent anterolateral advancement pharyngoplasty and group 2 (23 cases) underwent barbed relocation pharyngoplasty. According to the following criteria: both sex, age between 18 and 65 years, body mass index ≤ 32 kg/m2, Friedman stage II or III, type I Fujita, nocturnal polysomnography study diagnostic for OSA, retropalatal and lateral pharyngeal wall collapse, diagnosis with flexible nasoendoscopy during a Muller's maneuver based on a 5-point scale and drug-induced sleep endoscopy. Patients who suffered from retroglossal airway collapse were rolled out. RESULTS: Apnea-hypopnea index decreased from 27.50 ± 11.56 to 11.22 ± 7.63 (P ≤ .001) in group 1 and from 33.18 ± 10.94 to 12.38 ± 6.77 (P ≤ .001) in group 2. Retropalatal posterior airway space increased from 9.84 ± 1.29 mm to 21.48 ± 2.8 mm (P ≤ .001) in group 1 and increased from 10.26 ± 1.2 mm to 22.86 ± 2.62 mm (P ≤ .001) in group 2. Retropalatal space volume increased from 1.9 ± 0.68 cm3 to 2.75 ± 0.7 cm3 (P ≤ .001) in group 1 and increased from 1.96 ± 0.88 cm3 to 2.82 ± 0.83 cm3 (P ≤ .001) in group 2. Surgical success was 86.95% in group 1 compared to 82.6% in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques appear to be effective with a high surgical success rate in the treatment of OSA patients with retropalatal and lateral pharyngeal wall collapse.

Assessment of Behavioral Problems in Children Pre- and Post-Cochlear Implant: An Egyptian Study.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to detect the behavioral problems pre- and post-cochlear implantation in comparison to normal hearing group to be able to manage these problems to get more benefit from using cochlear implants. METHODS: A case-control study included 53 children was done. They were divided into 2 groups, the control group included 28 healthy volunteers with normal hearing and the case group included 25 children with severe to profound hearing loss, fitted for cochlear implantation. The Arabic Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) was used to detect different behavioral problems in both groups. Case group children were followed up and reassessed again by CBCL 3 months later after cochlear implantation. RESULTS: There were highly significant differences regarding total scores of internalizing and externalizing domains of empirically based CBCL between the control group and the case group after cochlear implants (p=0.001). There were non-significant differences in children within case group (pre- and post-cochlear implantation) regarding emotional and behavioral problems on both empirically based and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-based CBCL. CONCLUSION: For better results, it is necessary to include a specialist of psychosomatic medicine in the cochlear rehabilitation teamwork.

Comparative Study Between Conventional Microlaryngeal Surgery and Carbon Dioxide Laser in Management of Minimal Associated Pathological Lesions of Vocal Folds.

The aim of this study is to compare the relatively new CO2 laser microlaryngeal surgery and conventional cold dissection method in treatment of minimal associated pathological lesions of vocal folds. Eighty patients aged 20-70 years old were randomly divided into two groups, group A (40 patients) was treated by the conventional method and group B (40 patients) was treated with CO2 laser microlaryngeal surgery. Assessment procedures included GRBAS scale, stroboscopic examination, and Arabic version of voice handicap index. Results stated that improvement of quality of voice after surgery in both techniques had no significant difference. The significant difference was in operative time and bleeding because laser had less time and bleeding. Both techniques had no recurrence within 3-months follow-up.