Abstract

To compare resource utilization and clinical outcomes between endoscopic mass-closure and open techniques for laryngeal cleft repair.Case series with chart review.Tertiary academic children's hospital.Pediatric patients undergoing repair for Benjamin-Inglis type 1-3 laryngeal clefts over a 15-year period. All 20 patients undergoing endoscopic repair were included. Eight control patients undergoing open repair were selected using matching by age and cleft type. Demographic, clinical, and resource utilization data were collected.Twenty-eight patients were included (20 endoscopic, 8 open). Mean age, rates of tracheostomy and vocal fold immobility, and distribution of cleft types were not different between the 2 groups (all P > .2). Mean operative time (P = .004) and duration of hospital stay (P < .001) were significantly shorter in the endoscopic group. All repairs were intact in both groups at final postoperative endoscopy. Rates of persistent laryngeal penetration or aspiration on swallow study were not different between groups (P = 1.000), although results were available for only 11 patients.Endoscopic laryngeal cleft repair using a mass-closure technique provides a durable result while requiring significantly shorter operative times and hospital stays than open repair and avoiding the potential morbidity of laryngofissure. However, open repair may allow the simultaneous performance of other airway reconstructive procedures and may be a useful salvage technique when endoscopic repair fails. Postoperative swallowing results require further study.

View details for DOI 10.1177/0194599815576718

View details for Web of Science ID 000357297000019

View details for PubMedID 25782984