Evaluation of Voice in Patients with Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody Associated Vasculitides

Yıl 2024, , 55 - 59, 10.06.2024

Kerem Kokoglu , Melih Kızıltepe , Aslıhan Oflaz Çapar , Emel Oğuz Kökoğlu , Nezaket Tektaş , Abdurrahman Soner Şenel

https://doi.org/10.26650/Tr-ENT.2024.1412623

Öz

Objective: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitides (AAV) can affect the upper and lower respiratory tract. Evaluation of voice quality was aimed at patients with AAV in this paper.

Materials and Methods: In this study, AAV-diagnosed patients and their age-gender-compatible healthy counterparts were enrolled. Participants with histories of airway surgery, smoking, laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms, allergy, active nose, throat, and larynx infection were excluded. After the otolaryngologic examination, Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI) scores, maximum phonation times (MPT), auditory-perceptual analysis of voice (GRBAS score), and acoustic analysis were performed. The MPT, VHI, GRBAS, F0, jitter, shimmer, and harmonic-to-noise ratio (HNR) values of both groups were compared statistically. Parameters were evaluated using the PRAAT software.

Results: There were 30 subjects in each group (16 women and 14 men). The mean ages were 51.1 and 51.5 years in the patient and control groups. Significant differences were found between the two groups regarding median VHI scores, MPT, and GRBAS scores (p<0.05). While median VHI and GRBAS scores were higher in the vasculitis group, median MPT was shorter.

Conclusion: Voice quality may disturb patients with AAV, especially in terms of VHI, MPT, and GRBAS scores.

Anahtar Kelimeler

PRAAT, voice analysis, GRBAS score, jitter, shimmer

Kaynakça

• 1. Massicotte-Azarniouch D, Herrera C A, Jennette J C, Falk R J, Free M E. Mechanisms of vascular damage in ANCA vasculitis. in Seminars in Immunopathology. Semin Immunopathol 2022;44(3):325-45. google scholar
• 2. Born H, Rameau A. Hoarseness. Med Clin 2021;105(5):917-38. google scholar
• 3. Akbulut S, Aydinli FE, Kuşçu O, Özcebe E, Yilmaz T, Rosen CA, et al. Reliability and validity of the Turkish reflux symptom index. J Voice 2020;34(6):965.e23-8. google scholar
• 4. Kiliç MA, Okur E, Yildirim I, Oğüt F, Denizoğlu I, Kizilay A, et al. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Voice Handicap Index. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtisas Dergisi 2008;18(3):139-47. google scholar
• 5. Oğuz H, Kiliç MA, Şafak MA. Comparison of results in two acoustic analysis programs: Praat and MDVP. Turk J Med Sci 2011;41(5):835-41. google scholar
• 6. Kitching AR, Anders HJ, Basu N, Brouwer E, Gordon J, Jayne DR, et al. ANCA-associated vasculitis. Nat Rev Dis Prim 2020;6(1):1-27. google scholar
• 7. Dejonckere PH, Bradley P, Clemente P, Cornut G, Crevier-Buchman L, Friedrich G, et al. A basic protocol for functional assessment of voice pathology, especially for investigating the efficacy of (phonosurgical) treatments and evaluating new assessment techniques. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2001;258(2):77-82. google scholar
• 8. Solomon NP, Garlitz SJ, Milbrath RL. Respiratory and laryngeal contributions to maximum phonation duration. J Voice 2000;14(3):331-40. google scholar
• 9. Barsties B, De Bodt M. Assessment of voice quality: current state-of-the-art. Auris Nasus Larynx 2015;42(3):183-8. google scholar
• 10. Watts C, Schwan K, Hetjens S. The maximum phonation time as marker for voice treatment efficacy: a network meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol 2022;48(2);130-8. google scholar
• 11. Fujiki RB, Thibeault SL. Examining relationships between GRBAS ratings and acoustic, aerodynamic and patient-reported voice measures in adults with voice disorders. J Voice 2021;37(3):309-7. google scholar
• 12. Mohammed AA, Nagy A. Fundamental frequency and jitter percent in MDVP and Praat. J Voice 2021;37(4):496-503. google scholar
• 13. Jiang JJ, Zhang Y, MacCallum J, Sprecher A, Zhou L. Objective acoustic analysis of pathological voices from patients with vocal nodules and polyps. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 2009;61(6):342-9. google scholar 14. Fernandes J, Teixeira F, Guedes V, Junior A, Teixeira JP. Harmonic to noise ratio measurement-selection of window and length. Procedia Comput Sci 2018;138:280-5. google scholar
• 15. Marsano-Cornejo MJ, Roco-Videla Â, Capona-Corbalân D, Silva-Harthey C. Variation of the acoustic parameter harmonic-to-noise ratio in relation to different background noise levels. Acta Otorrinolaringol (English Edition) 2021;72(3):177-81. google scholar
• 16. Gurbuzler L, Inanir A, Yelken K, Koc S, Eyibilen A, Uysal IO, et al. Behcet’s disease impairs voice quality without laryngeal and hypopharyngeal involvement. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2012;269(12):2539-42. google scholar
• 17. Castro MAF, Dedivitis RA, Pfuetzenreiter Jûnior EG, Barros APB, Queija DdS. Videolaryngostroboscopy and voice evaluation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2012;78:121-7. google scholar
• 18. de Macedo MS, Costa KM, da Silva Filho M. Voice disorder in systemic lupus erythematosus. PloS one 2017;12(4):e0175893. google scholar
• 19. Ali M, Figueiredo F. Hoarse voice and visual loss. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89(2):240. google scholar
• 20. Sünter AV, Yiğit Ö, Alkan Z, Burnaz Ö. Acoustic Voice Analysis Findings in Ankylosing Spondylitis. Istanbul Med J 2019;20(3):231-3. google scholar