Tracheoesophageal diversion versus total laryngectomy for intractable aspiration

Toshiki Tomita, Kazuhito Tanaka, Seiichi Shinden, Kaoru Ogawa

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)


This study evaluates the outcome and surgical stress associated with surgery for intractable aspiration. A retrospective review was conducted to compare the results between tracheoesophageal diversion and total laryngectomy. The operative time, intra-operative bleeding, time until drain removal, feeding conditions and surgical complications were compared between the two groups. Of the 19 patients, 31.6 per cent underwent tracheoesophageal diversion and 68.4 per cent received total laryngectomy. The operative time and drain insertion periods were statistically shorter in the tracheoesophageal diversion group, while the amount of intra-operative blood loss was smaller in the tracheoesophageal diversion group. The complication rate and the feeding conditions before and after surgery for the two groups did not show any statistically significant difference. Tracheoesophageal diversion was thus found to be a simple, safe, and reliable therapeutic modality for the control of intractable aspiration. Moreover, it induced less surgical stress than total laryngectomy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)15-18
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Laryngology and Otology
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2004 Jan
Externally publishedYes


  • Aspiration
  • Laryngectomy
  • Oesophagus/surgery
  • Trachea

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology


Dive into the research topics of 'Tracheoesophageal diversion versus total laryngectomy for intractable aspiration'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this