Loading…

Pharyngeal Swallowing Mechanics Secondary to Hemispheric Stroke

Background Computational analysis of swallowing mechanics (CASM) is a method that utilizes multivariate shape change analysis to uncover covariant elements of pharyngeal swallowing mechanics associated with impairment using videofluoroscopic swallowing studies. The goals of this preliminary study we...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases 2017-05, Vol.26 (5), p.952-961
Main Authors: May, Nelson H., BS, Pisegna, Jessica M., PhD cand., MS, MEd, Marchina, Sarah, PhD, Langmore, Susan E., PhD, Kumar, Sandeep, MD, Pearson, William G., PhD
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:Background Computational analysis of swallowing mechanics (CASM) is a method that utilizes multivariate shape change analysis to uncover covariant elements of pharyngeal swallowing mechanics associated with impairment using videofluoroscopic swallowing studies. The goals of this preliminary study were to (1) characterize swallowing mechanics underlying stroke-related dysphagia, (2) decipher the impact of left and right hemispheric strokes on pharyngeal swallowing mechanics, and (3) determine pharyngeal swallowing mechanics associated with penetration–aspiration status. Methods Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies of 18 dysphagic patients with hemispheric infarcts and age- and gender-matched controls were selected from well-controlled data sets. Patient data including laterality and penetration–aspiration status were collected. Coordinates mapping muscle group action during swallowing were collected from videos. Multivariate morphometric analyses of coordinates associated with stroke, affected hemisphere, and penetration–aspiration status were performed. Results Pharyngeal swallowing mechanics differed significantly in the following comparisons: stroke versus controls ( D  = 2.19, P  
ISSN:1052-3057
1532-8511
DOI:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.11.001