Comparison of olfactory functions of individuals with total laryngectomy using different voice restoration methods

Authors:
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
To investigate whether there is a difference in olfactory functions among individuals who use different voice restoration methods after total laryngectomy. The study group for this research comprised individuals who had undergone total laryngectomy and aged 44 to 75 years; 10 participants using oesophageal speech, 10 participants using tracheoesophageal speech, and 10 participants using electrolarynx were included. The control group comprised 10 individuals with normal olfactory function of similar age and gender to the individuals in the study group. The participants' olfactory functions were evaluated using the Sniffin Sticks Extended Test. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - H&N-35 was used as a subjective scale. All laryngectomised patients exhibited olfactory impairment, with 73.3% diagnosed with anosmia and 26.7% with hyposmia. Regarding Sniffin Sticks Test combined scores; the mean values of voice prosthesis users, electrolarynx and oesophageal speech group were 8.4, 10.1 and 21.6 respectively, while in the control group it was 38.2. In terms of Sniffin Sticks Test composite scores, the oesophageal speech group had significantly higher scores than the voice prosthesis and electrolarynx groups (p < 0.001). While all laryngectomised patients showed olfactory dysfunction, those using oesophageal speech - a somewhat overlooked rehabilitation method - exhibited statistically significant preservation of olfactory function compared to other voice restoration techniques. These findings suggest that oesophageal speech may offer distinct advantages for maintaining post-laryngectomy olfactory capacity, warranting further consideration in clinical practise.
Funding Information
  • Hacettepe University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (TYL-2019-17644)

This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit: