Loading…

Laryngeal Adductor Reflex and Pharyngeal Squeeze as Predictors of Laryngeal Penetration and Aspiration

Objectives The contribution of laryngopharyngeal (LP) sensory deficits to the outcome of swallowing and the relationship between sensory and motor deficits in the laryngopharynx is unclear. The study purpose is to determine if patients with LP sensory and motor deficits are at increased risk for lar...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Laryngoscope 2002-02, Vol.112 (2), p.338-341
Main Authors: Aviv, Jonathan E., Spitzer, Jaclyn, Cohen, Manderly, Ma, Guoguang, Belafsky, Peter, Close, Lanny G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives The contribution of laryngopharyngeal (LP) sensory deficits to the outcome of swallowing and the relationship between sensory and motor deficits in the laryngopharynx is unclear. The study purpose is to determine if patients with LP sensory and motor deficits are at increased risk for laryngeal penetration and aspiration during swallowing, and to determine the relationship between pharyngeal motor weakness and LP sensory deficits. Materials and Methods Endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing was performed on 122 dysphagic patients who were prospectively divided into two groups. The control group was 76 patients with normal sensitivity, determined by an intact laryngeal adductor reflex (LAR) on air pulse stimulation of the mucosa innervated by the superior laryngeal nerve. The study group was 46 patients with severe sensory deficits, determined by an absent LAR. Each group was given puree followed by thin liquid, noting presence or absence of laryngeal penetration and aspiration. Pharyngeal muscle strength was assessed by noting presence or absence of pharyngeal contraction during voluntary adduction of the vocal folds (pharyngeal squeeze). Results In control subjects, with purees, 6 of 76 (7.90%) penetrated and 3 of 76 (3.94%) aspirated; with thins, 26 of 76 (34.2%) penetrated and 13 of 76 (17.1%) aspirated. In the absent LAR group, with purees, 39 of 46 (84.8%) penetrated and 32 and 46 (69.6%) aspirated; with thins, 46 of 46 (100%) penetrated and 43 of 46 (93.5%) aspirated. For both consistencies, the differences in prevalence of penetration and aspiration between groups was significant (P
ISSN:0023-852X
1531-4995
DOI:10.1097/00005537-200202000-00025