Primary Tracheoesophageal Puncture vs Esophageal Speech

Miquel Quer, Joaquim Burgués Vila, Pedro García Crespillo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

26 Citations (Scopus)


We studied the cost-efficiency profile of tracheoesophageal puncture with prosthesis insertion in alaryngeal patients who were given the opportunity of choosing between esophageal and prosthetic voice. A primary tracheoesophageal puncture was made in 28 patients who were undergoing total laryngectomy. Five of the patients were excluded from the study because of failure to phonate correctly with their prostheses. The remainder were given esophageal speech instruction while they were using tracheoesophageal speech, and were permanently allowed to shift between both techniques of alaryngeal voice. Seventy percent of the patients (16/23) left the prosthetic voice to use only esophageal speech, even though they agreed that prosthetic voice was superior to esophageal voice. The remaining 30% (7/23) continued to use tracheoesophageal speech almost exclusively. In the authors' opinion, primary tracheoesophageal punctures significantly provide both psychological and practical help, as they supply an immediate and clear postoperative voice, and one of every three patients will use them for daily oral communication. Nevertheless, esophageal speech is still the method of voice restoration preferred in our region by those of our patients who managed to learn it. © 1992, American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)188-190
JournalArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1992


Dive into the research topics of 'Primary Tracheoesophageal Puncture vs Esophageal Speech'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this