You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 113 No. 5, May 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

A Comparison of Three Methods of Oral Reconstruction

Fred M. S. McConnel, MD; John F. Teichgraeber, MD; Richard K. Adler, PhD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1987;113(5):496-500.


Abstract

• A protocol is presented that was designed to provide comparative data on the two primary oral cavity functions affected by surgery: speech and swallowing. Three types of reconstruction (skin grafts, hemitongue flaps, and myocutaneous flaps) and results of a series of tests given to 15 surgical patients with T2 and T3 tongue and/or floor of mouth lesions were evaluated. The patients who had split-thickness skin grafts had the best oral function results. The study suggests that tongue mobility is the most significant variable in determining postoperative speech results.

(Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1987;113:496-500)



Author Affiliations

From the Division of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Emory Clinic, Atlanta.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication June 18, 1986.

Reprint requests to Division of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Emory Clinic, 1365 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322 (Dr McConnel).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Quality of Life for Patients Following Total Laryngectomy vs Chemoradiation for Laryngeal Preservation
Hanna et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:875-879.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Speech Intelligibility After Glossectomy and Speech Rehabilitation
Furia et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:877-883.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Functional Results of Primary Closure vs Flaps in Oropharyngeal Reconstruction: A Prospective Study of Speech and Swallowing
McConnel et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;124:625-630.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Transmandibular Approaches to the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx: A Functional Assessment
Christopoulos et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1992;118:1164-1167.
ABSTRACT  

Use of the Levator Scapulae Muscle Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction
Goodman and Donald
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;116:1440-1444.
ABSTRACT  

Transoral Carbon Dioxide Laser Ablation for Cancer, Tumors, and Other Diseases
Panje et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989;115:681-688.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1987 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.