Role of the "rising tide sign" in the diagnosis and assessment of the results of surgery for Zenker's diverticulum

Phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists approaching oropharyngeal dysphagia: an update on FEES

PURPOSE

Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is a common phenomenon in otorhinolaryngology and phoniatrics. As both sub-disciplines have a strong tradition and clinical experience in endoscopic assessment of the upper aerodigestive tract, the implementation of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) was an almost self-evident evolution. This review aims to provide an update on FEES and the role of phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists using FEES in Europe.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was performed by experts in the field of FEES both in the clinical context and in the field of scientific research.

RESULTS

FEES is the first-choice OD assessment technique for both phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists. FEES is becoming increasingly popular because of its usefulness, safety, low costs, wide applicability, and feasibility in different clinical settings. FEES can be performed by health professionals of varying disciplines, once adequate knowledge and skills are acquired. FEES aims to determine OD nature and severity and can provide diagnostic information regarding the underlying etiology. The direct effect of therapeutic interventions can be evaluated using FEES, contributing to design the OD management plan. Standardization of FEES protocols and metrics is still lacking. Technological innovation regarding image resolution, frame rate frequency, endoscopic light source specifications, and endoscopic rotation range has contributed to an increased diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION

The rising number of phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists performing FEES contributes to the early detection and treatment of OD in an aging European population. Nevertheless, a multidisciplinary approach together with other disciplines is crucial for the success of OD management.

Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing findings in individuals with Zenker's diverticulum and cricopharyngeal bar

PURPOSE

To assess fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) findings in individuals with cricopharyngeal bar (CPB) and Zenker's diverticulum (ZD).

METHODS

In this retrospective chart review spanning from 2010-2018, individuals diagnosed with CPB or ZD and undergoing FEES were identified. Patient demographics, radiographic studies, and treatments were recorded, and findings were compared between CPB, ZD of < 3 cm, and ZD ≥ 3 cm.

RESULTS

Sixty-one individuals consisting of 48 patients with ZD and 13 patients with CPB met inclusion criteria. Post-swallow hypopharyngeal reflux (PSHR) of undigested food bolus, present with or without Valsalva maneuver, was noted in 23%, 84%, and 75% of patients with CPB, ZD < 3 cm, and ZD ≥ 3 cm, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the finding for those with ZD were 81% and 83%, respectively. Of patients with ZD, reflux resolved in all but six individuals after surgery. Four of these patients underwent revision surgery with the reflux subsequently resolving, and two patients with persistent reflux were asymptomatic and did not desire further treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

PSHR is a good tool to identify the presence of a ZD and is less helpful to identify a CPB. Elimination of PSHR is a good tool to determine treatment success in patients with ZD and CPB.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Adverse Events after Rigid and Flexible Endoscopic Repair of Zenker’s Diverticula: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

To determine adverse events after endoscopic flexible vs endoscopic rigid cricopharyngeal myotomy for treatment of Zenker’s diverticulum (ZD).

Data Sources

Systematic review of MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all years according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additional studies were identified from review citations and a by hand search of manuscripts referencing ZD.

Review Methods

A structured literature search was conducted to identify studies for this systematic review. Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria were applied to assess study quality. For inclusion, each study had to provide data for at least 10 adult patients who had undergone endoscopic ZD repair reporting clear association with the postprocedure course in each case. Data extracted included all reported adverse events, recurrences, follow-up, and operative times.

Results

In total, 115 studies were included. All but 8 were retrospective case series. Sixty-one reported series of patients after rigid endoscopic stapler repair, 31 after rigid laser repair, and 13 with other rigid endoscopic instruments. Twenty-nine flexible endoscopic studies were included. Mortality, infection, and perforation were not significantly more likely in either the rigid or the flexible group, but bleeding and recurrence were more likely after flexible endoscopic techniques (20% vs <10% and 4% vs 0%, respectively). Dental injury and vocal fold palsy were reported rarely in the rigid endoscopic groups.

Conclusions

Adverse events are rare after endoscopic Zenker’s repair. The flexible approach minimizes exposure limitations and can be completed in some patients without general anesthesia. Transoral rigid approaches result in fewer revision surgeries compared with flexible diverticulotomy.