A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Functional benefit after modification of radial forearm free flap for soft palate reconstruction. | LitMetric

Functional benefit after modification of radial forearm free flap for soft palate reconstruction.

Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol

Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Hallym University, College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Published: September 2008

Objectives: To compare the velopharyngeal function, swallowing and speech of the conventional and modified radial forearm free flap (RFFF) for soft palate reconstruction.

Methods: Retrospective clinical study. Twenty-eight patients who underwent oropharyngeal reconstruction with RFFF were divided into two groups: 10 patients had conventional folded RFFF and 18 patients underwent modified method.

Results: The average speech intelligibility score in modified RFFF group was 8.0+/-2.4, and 6.2+/-2.2 in conventional RFFF group (P<0.05). The nasalance was 27.4+/-7.8% in modified group and 38.6+/-2.7% in conventional group during no nasal passage reading and 43.6+/-7.3% in modified group, 55.2+/-7.6% in conventional group during high nasal passage reading (P<0.05). The subjective swallowing functional score was 2.8 in modified group and 2.1 in conventional group.

Conclusion: The speech assessment and nasalance demonstrate a more favorable outcome in modified group than conventional group.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2671750PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3342/ceo.2008.1.3.161DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

radial forearm
8
forearm free
8
free flap
8
soft palate
8
patients underwent
8
rfff group
8
rfff
5
functional benefit
4
benefit modification
4
modification radial
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!