Vocal Cord Paralysis and Dysphagia after Aortic Arch Reconstruction and Norwood Procedure

OBJECTIVES: Determine the incidence of vocal cord paralysis and dysphagia after aortic arch reconstruction including Norwood procedure. SETTING: Tertiary Children’s Hospital STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. METHODS: Database/chart review of neonates requiring Norwood or arch surgery between January 2005 through December 2012. Demographics, postoperative vocal cord function, dysphagia, need for gastrostomy tube and/or tracheotomy, and long-term follow-up were reviewed. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one consecutive subjects(96 Norwood, 55 aortic arch) were reviewed. Median age at repair was 9 days(IQR 7–13) for Norwood, 24 days(IQR 12–49) for arch reconstruction(p<0.001). Documentation of VC motion abnormality was found in 60/104(57.6%) subjects, and unavailable in 47:16 without documentation and 31 who expired prior to extubation. There were no significant differences in proportions of documented VC motion(p=0.337), dysphagia(p=0.987), and VC paralysis(p=0.706) between the arch and Norwood groups. Dysphagia was found in 73.5% of Norwood and 69.2% of arch subjects who had documented VC paralysis. Even without UVCP, dysphagia was present (56% Norwood,61% arch). Overall, 120/151(79.5%) required feeding evaluation and modified feeding regimen. Gastrostomy was required in 31% of Norwood and 23.6% of arch reconstruction overall. To date, mortality in this series is 55/151(36.4%) patients. Of those with VC paralysis, only 23(22%) had any otolaryngology follow-up after discharge from surgery. Over 75% with VC paralysis with follow-up after hospital discharge had persistent VC paralysis 11.5 months after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: There is high incidence of UVCP and dysphagia after Norwood and arch reconstruction. Dysphagia was highly prevalent in both groups even without UVCP. Preoperative discussion on vocal cord function and dysphagia should be considered

Prevention of HPV-Related Oral Cancer by Dentists: Assessing the Opinion of Dutch Dental Students

The aim of this study is to assess dental students’ opinions of the dentists’ role in primary prevention of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oral cancer using a cross-sectional web-based survey. A questionnaire, containing questions about knowledge of HPV and oral cancer, confidence in head and neck examination and role of the dentist in preventing HPV-related oral cancer, was sent to all students of the Academic Centre of Dentistry Amsterdam (n = 912). One hundred and twenty-six (n = 126) students completed the questionnaire. Significantly, more master students (75%) than bachelor students (54.3%) were aware that HPV is a causative factor for oral cancer. Master students had more knowledge of HPV than bachelor students, but knowledge about HPV vaccination was irrespective of the study phase. The majority of dental students agreed that it is important to discuss HPV vaccination with patients. Eighty-nine percent of the students think that more education about symptoms of oral cancer will increase screening for oral cancer. Development of a protocol for screening in dental practices was considered even more important. According to dental students, dentists should discuss HPV as a risk factor for oral cancer with patients. Future dentists are willing to be involved in both primary and secondary prevention of HPV-related oral cancer. Therefore, screening for oral cancer and education about HPV vaccination should be integral elements of the dental curriculum