Sulcus mucosal slicing technique

Paulo Pontesa and Mara Behlaub

a
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck
Surgery and bDepartment of Speech Language
Pathology and Audiology, Federal University of São
Paulo, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP),
and professor at Center of Voice Studies – CEV
(‘Centro Estudos da Voz’), São Paulo, Brazil
Correspondence to Paulo Pontes, MD, Rua Diogo de
Faria 171, São Paulo, SP 04037–000, Brazil
Tel: +55 11 5549 2188; fax: +55 11 5549 2188;
e-mail: ppontes@inlar.com.br.
Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and
Neck Surgery 2010, 18:512–520
Purpose of review
To present the accurate surgical indication for the slicing mucosal technique, the case
selection, surgical aspects, rehabilitation concerns, and the characteristics of
immediate and long-term outcomes.
Recent findings
The literature is still scarce; few cases are submitted to the slicing mucosa technique
due to its specific indication; an alternative procedure was designed for cases where
mucosal movement is strongly reduced, the inner section of the vocal ligament or
submucosal scar tissue, which can eventually be associated with fat inclusion. Some
selected cases may require thyroplasty type III to optimize functional results.
Summary
Slicing technique is an aggressive powerful resource for the surgical treatment of
severe cases of sulcus striae major, in which mucosal wave is absent and glottic chink is
moderate to severe; voice is intensely deviated immediately postoperation; vocal
rehabilitation is mandatory and an intensive regimen is usually required for the first
2 months; final results can mostly be achieved up to 6 months.

Keywords
dysphonia, slicing technique, sulcus striae, sulcus vocalis

Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 18:512–520

ß 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
1068-9508

in the first half of the 20th century, have already pointed

Introduction and historical notes
The sulcus was first described by the Italian anatomist
Giacomini, in 1892 [1], and described repeatedly since
then in very few publications [2–4]. However, with the
advent of better diagnostic tools and dissemination
of knowledge, its identification has been extended
[5–9,10,11].
There are no data on the incidence of this alteration. The
literature has been exploring two main causes: a conge-
nital deviation/disorder or as a result of trauma. The
congenital disorder cause was described early in the
literature [2], even with a postulation of faulty genesis
of the fourth and sixth branchial arches [6]; degeneration
of fibroblasts in the macula flavae similar to age-related
degeneration of vocal folds [8]. Four familial cases [12]
and monozygotic twin sisters [13] have been described.
Some authors consider that the cause may be due to a
repetitive trauma [5,14], infection or as a rupture of a
vocal cyst [6,15]; other authors admit more than one cause
[4–6,16] and even speculate that both causes can be
complementary [17].
Our group considers that sulcus has a congenital cause;
however, it is only one of many anatomical variations that
may occur at the vocal fold level. German authors [2,18],
1068-9508 ß 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
out that some of these alterations produced no interfer-
ence with the vital laryngeal function but could even-
tually hamper the phonatory function of the larynx.
These were called minor congenital anomalies. However,
due to their frequent occurrence and no impact in several
cases, they cannot be considered anomalies or malfor-
mations. Our proposal is that these alterations can be
considered anatomical variations, broadly classified into
four morphological categories: sulcus, cysts, mucosal
bridge and microdiaphragms (Table 1) [19].
Taking into consideration the German proposal, we
updated the term by replacing anomaly or malformation
with structural alterations; actually, minor structural altera-
tions. These differentiated anatomical variations are the
utmost expression of a large possibility of deviations, most
of them without a specific morphological identity and, for
this reason, called undifferentiated alterations. These
variations at lamina propriae level also introduce changes
at the vascular network, which loses the classical parallel or
almost parallel distribution in the free edge of the vocal
fold, with dichotomic small caliber vessels at the mucosa.
The altered vascular trajectory should not be considered as
ectasias, varices or other vascular diseases but simply
vascular dysgenesia due to the congenital anatomical
variation of the vocal fold cover [20].
DOI:10.1097/MOO.0b013e3283402a3b

Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Table 1 Classification of sulcus according to Pontes et al. [19], considering other minor structural alterations of the larynx
Minor structural alterations Undifferentiated
of vocal fold cover Differentiated
Vascular dysgenesia
The functional impact of a minor structural change
depends on its morphology and on the individual vocal
profile. There is not a direct and simple correlation
between morphology and functional outcome. Besides
the morphological configuration, axiological factors,
personality aspects (extraversion trait), vocal usage, occu-
pational demands and vocal hygiene habits may trigger
the dysphonia. Vocal deviations, besides vocal fatigue
and effort to phonate, can include high-pitched voice,
instability, roughness, breathiness and strain.
Sulcus classification
The morphological classification of sulcus adopted by us
is as follows: occult sulcus, sulcus striae (or vergeture) and
sulcus pocket.
Occult sulcus
This alteration is solely identified by laryngostroboscopy
during phonation through observation of the mucosal
wave formation. The impact on spoken voice is minimal
and, if present, restricted to vocal range. Dysphonia can
be triggered when vocal loading is enhanced.
Sulcus striae
The term striae (vergeture) was proposed by Bouchayer
et al. [6] in order to characterize vocal fold depressions
similar to skin marks (wrinkles). However, we propose
two variants, the minor and major ones, according to the
distance between the depression lips.
In sulcus striae minor, lips are usually in contact along its
whole surface; the image looks like an incision (Figs 1
and 2). The sulcus striae minor can be unilateral or
bilateral, single or multiple, reduced or extended in
length. Its presence can be better visualized during
inspiratory movement, with open vocal folds and less
light contrast at the sulcus surface. In some cases, it is
identified only during exploratory microlaryngoscopy or
surgery for other lesions. The minor striae can reduce the
mucosal vibration and consequently alter vocal quality;
secondary ipsilateral and contralateral lesions, such as
polyps and edemas, are usually seen.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Sulcus mucosal slicing technique Pontes and Behlau 513
Sulcus Occult
Striae Minor
Major
Pocket
Deep
Epidermoid cysts Superficial
Fistulized
Mucosal bridge
Laryngeal microdiaphragm
Sulcus striae major is visualized as a mucosal depression
similar to a groove or a furrow due to the relative distance
between its lips, creating a superior and inferior margin,
the latter usually rigid (Figs 3 and 4). The vocal impact is
related to the depth of the sulcus, which produces a
distorted mucosal wave that can even be absent. Voice
is rough, tense, high-pitched and usually disagreeable,
sometimes with a diplophonic component; breathiness
can be severe and even produce phonatory breaks. Con-
trary to the previously presented variant, the sulcus striae
major rarely produces secondary lesions due to lack of
enough glottic closure.
The treatment of this alteration has to consider its main
functional consequence. For discrete cases, vocal reha-
bilitation can lead to stabilization; for severe cases
(reduced or absent mucosal wave and moderate to large
glottic chinks), surgery is usually applied.
Sulcus pocket
Previously named open cyst or sulcus vocalis [6], a sulcus
pocket corresponds to a real cavity in the vocal fold, in
which the lips still preserve contact [21] (Figs 5 and 6). Its
presentation is usually like a mucosal bump, similar to a
cyst (a frequent misdiagnosis), as the mucosal opening is
Figure 1 Schematic drawing of a sulcus stria minor
 514 Laryngology and bronchoesophagology
Figure 2 Sulcus stria minor (arrow), under laryngoscopic vision,
during inspiration
rarely seen in routine examinations. Its mucosal wave has
a better vibratory pattern than the striae sulcus. Glottic
closure can be complete, irregular or with double chink.
Secondary lesions, such as polyps, contralateral reactions,
leukoplakias and chronic laryngitis are frequently associ-
ated. Monochorditis is usually a sign of sulcus pocket
presence at vocal fold level. Voice is usually low-pitched
due to the increase of the vocal fold mass. Dysphonia
degree can vary and be present in a fluctuating fashion;
inflammatory episodes are the main cause of vocal varia-
bility. Vocal rehabilitation is suggested to improve muco-
sal vibration, to reduce secondary lesions and to achieve a
differential diagnosis with vocal fold nodules. Surgery for
sulcus pocket is the deepithelization of the cavity.
Many authors have classified the sulcus with different
criteria, and therefore there is not a correspondence
among them. Table 2 [22,23] presents these classifi-
cations distributed similarly to the anatomical classifi-
Figure 3 Schematic drawing of a sulcus striae major
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Figure 4 Sulcus stria major (arrow), under laryngoscopic vision,
during inspiration
cation of Pontes et al. [19]. Ford et al. [11] provided a
categorization of three types of sulcus: type I, named
physiological sulcus, is a depression that does not reach
the vocal ligament; type II is a full-length musculomem-
branous vocal fold depression, extending down to the
vocal ligament or further; and type III is a deep focal
indentation of the vocal fold that does not involve the
whole length of the focal fold.
The surgery is an anatomical procedure with a functional
goal. Therefore, a morphologically based classification is
beneficial to design and plan the surgery.
Management of sulcus striae
Several surgical techniques to treat sulcus striae have
been proposed, with variable results: sulcus resection
[24], vocal fold augumentation volume through endo-
scopic techniques using collagen [25], fat [26,27,28],
Figure 5 Schematic drawing of sulcus pocket

Figure 6 Interior exposure of the sulcus pocket with spatula in
microlaryngoscopy
muscle fascia implantation [29], external medialization
via thyroplasty type I [30,31], and laryngoplasty with
tissue transposition [32,33].
In cases with no mucosal wave and cordal vibration (one
mass regimen), with large glottic chinks, the above-men-
tioned techniques are insufficient to produce a better
vocal quality and/or provide vocal endurance. Vocal fold
medialization or sulculectomy will not be able to provide
mucosal pliability and may even introduce more mech-
anical resistance to phonate. Therefore, surgical inter-
ventions may have to be aggressive, as the tissue pres-
ervation rule may not apply here due to the fact that these
patients do not show a normal configuration of the multi-
layered mucosal structure. In these cases, our surgery
option is using the slicing technique [34].
Technical challenges of the slicing mucosa
technique
There are many technical challenges of the slicing
mucosa technique, some related to the nature of the
alteration and others to the surgeon’s skills. The goal
of the surgery is to interrupt the longitudinal tension
produced by the presence of the sulcus, as well as to
promote mucosal vibration by bringing the pliable ven-
Table 2 Pontes et al. [19] classification of vocal sulcus and similar classifications
Author Occult Striae minor
Bouchayer et al. [6] – Vergeture
Nakayama et al. [22] – Type IIa
Ford et al. [11] Type I Type II
Pérouse and Coulombeau [23] – –
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Sulcus mucosal slicing technique Pontes and Behlau 515
Figure 7 Sulcus striae major: endoscopic approach
tricular face tissue to participate in the sound source.
With this procedure, a triple result can be obtained:
pliability of the mucosa, vibratory tecidual structure
and reduction of glottic chink.
The main technical challenges are listed below:
(1) Visibility (Fig. 7): adequate visual surgical condition
to perform endoscopic approach surgery.
(2) Soft tissue identification (Fig. 8): longitudinal
incision at the vocal fold vestibular face away from
the edge, as close as possible to the laryngeal ven-
tricle, including the available soft tissue.
(3) Main flap procedure (Fig. 9): out from the longi-
tudinal incision, a tissue flap inferiorly based has to
be created with a 2-mm depth from the sulcus
inferior margin; the tissue flap has to be thick to
preserve vascular properties and avoid necrosis; in
all cases vocal ligament will be partially or totally
included; in a few cases some portion of the thyr-
oarytenoid muscle will take part of the flap.
(4) Number of secondary flaps: a minimum of four
different length incisions, perpendicular from the
free edge of the main flap (counter-incisions) have to
be created in order to produce at least three small
flaps.
Classification
Striae major Sulcus pocket
Vergeture Sulcus vocalis
Type I Type IIb
Type II Type III
Vergeture first, second and third degree Open cyst
 516 Laryngology and bronchoesophagology
Figure 8 Longitudinal incision at the left vocal fold
(5) Secondary flaps procedure (Figs 10–13): a progress-
ive and alternate approach has to be applied in order
to avoid retraction and loss of control of surgical site.
Usually three to five small counter-incisions have to
be done to obtain three to four mucosal flaps. The
inferior margin of the sulcus has to be surpassed in
order to interrupt the tension line.
(6) Size of secondary flaps (Fig. 14): the surgeon must
be cautious in order to produce the flaps with
different depth to avoid reestablishing the tensional
scar line.
(7) Hemostasis (Fig. 15): Hemostasis is generally easily
controlled with adrenalin-embedded cotton; radio-
Figure 9 Main flap procedure
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Figure 10 Secondary flaps procedure: first incision
frequency should be avoided, when possible. No
sutures are necessary.
(8) Positioning of secondary flaps: the slicing movement
will bring about the flaps into an adequate position.
No manipulation is done.
(9) Bilateral approach (Fig. 16): both sides need to be
approached at the same surgical timing; even
though there may be asymmetrical impairment.
This procedure will favor vocal rehabilitation. In
three cases of our series where the bilateral approach
was not respected, results were highly limited.
(10) Postsurgical complication: synechiae and granulo-
mas are rarely seen; synechiae are usually soft and
Figure 11 Secondary flaps procedure: four small
counter-incisions

Figure 12 Secondary flaps procedure: progressive approach
can be easily cut without recurrence; small granu-
lomas do not need to be removed.
(11) Postsurgical care: prophylactic antimicrobials and
antireflux drugs should be prescribed; a 2-day com-
plete vocal rest followed by 10-day partial rest regi-
men is administered; vocal rehabilitation starts in
the second week after surgery.
(12) Presurgery and postsurgery: laryngoscopical images
(Fig. 17).
A variant of this technique, the inner vocal ligament
section [35,36], may be used when the glottic chink is
mild or moderate; the result of this procedure can be
optimized with fat injection.
Figure 13 Secondary flaps procedure: surpassing inferior
margin
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Sulcus mucosal slicing technique Pontes and Behlau 517
Figure 14 Secondary flaps procedure: unilateral final view
Rehabilitation concerns: from preoperative
assessment to short-term and long-term
results
Two important complaints have to be considered at
preoperative evaluation: the overall degree of vocal
quality deviation and the amount of effort to phonate.
Preoperative voice assessment and a careful counseling
session contribute to patient adherence with surgery and
long-term postoperative rehabilitation.
The sulcus vocalis patient, with an intense degree of
vocal deviation, usually deals with a long-term dysphonia,
which includes frustration and unsatisfactory coping
Figure 15 Hemostasis: adrenalin-embedded cotton
 518 Laryngology and bronchoesophagology
Figure 16 Both sides approached: final view
strategies. Self-assessment protocols like Voice Handicap
Index (VHI) and Voice-Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL)
can reveal very deviated scores [37], with a high disadvan-
tage level [up to 90, extremely high in comparison with
normal voice individuals (3.5) and dysphonic patients], and
a very reduced quality of life regarding the voice impact
[down to 12, very low when compared with healthy voices
(97.1) and dysphonic individuals (71.6), even lower than
scores from laryngectomized patients and severe neuro-
Figure 17 Presurgical and postsurgical images
(a and b) Presurgical inspiratory and phonatory images. (c and d) Postsurgical inspiratory and phonatory images.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
logical cases (Brazilian data)] [38–40]. It is interesting to
point out that the number of coping strategies [41] used to
deal with the problem can be very high, almost 40% higher
than the average voice patient, meaning that the patient
tries to cope with it in as many ways as he/she is able to.
Voice after surgery can be even worse than prior to it. The
patient needs to be fully informed and prepared for what
he/she will face. Self-assessment protocols can show even
higher deviated scores, even though acoustic, aerodynamic
and stroboscopic data may have improved [37], demanding
a careful long-term follow-up by a multidisciplinary team.
The postoperative vocal evaluation usually reveals the
presence of purely frictional source, without voicing.
Voice rehabilitation after surgery aims to activate glottic
source and to increase tissue pliability.
There is no consensus on the best vocal rehabilitation
protocol for treating the sulcus [17]. However, in most
of the cases, vocal rehabilitation follows the same general
principles as for vocal fold scar [42]. The recovery process
usually involves both functional and organic issues. A
long-term program of exercises (4–8 months) is fre-
quently needed in case of severe sulcus submitted to
multiple mucosal slicing surgical technique to release
deep tension lines [34].
The first goal of vocal rehabilitation is to activate
the mucosal vibration in order to avoid supraglottic

involvement and general muscle hyperfunctioning. Two
strategies can be initially used to activate the surgical site:
nasal (‘m’ and ‘n’) or voiced fricative sounds (‘v’ or ‘z’). A
clear short-unit production is the goal for the first month
of rehabilitation (usually 10 units, three subsequent
series, 10 times a day). In cases when the ventricular
fold interference persists, inhalation phonation and
yawn–sigh techniques can be effective [34]. Fatigue is
a frequent complaint at this stage; patients usually report
having to work too hard to phonate. Three to four sessions
a week are needed for the first month until voicing is
achieved. The second goal is to extend voicing to speech
segments, using controlled phonetic environment sylla-
bles, words and phrases. A visual monitoring system, such
as real-time spectrographic trace (GRAM program,
Visualization Software; FonoView Software, CTS Infor-
matica) is of great help in aiding the patient to control
voicing (visual–vocal loop). The third goal is to improve
mucosal flexibility by vocal fold elongation and short-
ening exercises (gliding with nasal and voiced fricative
sounds). At this moment lip and tongue trills can be
introduced. Semi-occluded vocal tract exercises (reduced
diameter straws or larger glass tubes) can be effective in
dealing with vocal fatigue and promoting vocal endur-
ance. Monitoring fundamental frequency and targeting a
specific low-frequency range may be necessary.
Therapy follows an intensive regimen generally up to
4 months, when once a week or every fortnight dose can
be applied. In some cases, monthly follow-up and
reinforcement sessions are used for a period of a year
after surgery.
Conclusion
The slicing technique surgery for the severe cases of sulcus
striae major is a complex procedure that requires a skilled
surgeon and a team effort due to a long rehabilitation
program. The treatment goal is to improve functionality
and to reach a stable voice, with reduced effort, which does
not always correlate with a perfectly normal vocal fold.
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have
been highlighted as:
 of special interest
 of outstanding interest
Additional references related to this topic can also be found in the Current
World Literature section in this issue (p. 578).
1 Giacomini C. Report on the anatomy of the negro (in Italian). Acad Med Torino
1892; 40:17–61.
2 Arnold GE. Dysplastic dysphonia: minor anomalies of the vocal cords causing
persistent hoarseness. Laryngoscope 1958; 68:142–158.
3 Luchsinger R, Arnold GE. Voice, speech, language, clinical communicology:
its physiology, pathology. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing; 1965.
4 Hirano M. Phonosurgery: basic and clinical investigations. Otol Futuoka
1975; 21:239–242.
5 Itoh T, Kawasaki H, Morikawa I, Hirano M. Vocal fold furrows. A 10-year review
of 240 patients. Auris Nasus Larynx 1983; 10 (Suppl):S17–S26.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Sulcus mucosal slicing technique Pontes and Behlau 519
6 Bouchayer M, Cornut G, Witzig E, et al. Epidermoid cysts, sulci, and mucosal
bridges of the true vocal cord: a report of 157 cases. Laryngoscope 1985;
95:1087–1094.
7 Lindestad PA, Hertegård S. Spindle-shaped glottal insufficiency with and
without sulcus vocalis: a retrospective study. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1994;
103:547–553.
8 Sato K, Hirano M. Electron microscopic investigation of sulcus vocalis. Ann
Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1998; 107:56–60.
9 Remacle M, Lawson G, Degols JC, et al. Microsurgery of sulcus vergeture
with carbon dioxide laser and injectable collagen. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol
2000; 109:141–148.
10 Dailey SH, Ford CN. Surgical management of sulcus vocalis and vocal fold
 scarring. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2006; 39:23–42.
An excellent article on surgical procedures to manage sulcus vocalis.
11 Ford CN, Inagi K, Khidr A, et al. Sulcus vocalis: a rational analytical approach to
diagnosis and management. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1996; 105:189–200.
12 Martins RHG, Silva R, Ferreira DM, Dias NH. Sulcus vocalis: possible genetic
pathology. Report of four familiar cases (in Portuguese). Rev Bras Otorrino-
laringol 2007; 73–74.
13 Cakir ZA, Yigit O, Kocak I, et al. Sulcus vocalis in monozygotic twins. Auris
Nasus Larynx 2010; 37:255–257.
14 Van Caneghan D. The etiology of the vocal cord furrow (in French). Ann Mal
Oreille Larynx Nez Pharynx 1928; 43:121–130.
15 Priston J. The evolution of an epidermoid cyst during vocal mutation (in
Portuguese). In: Behlau M, editor. O Melhor Que Vi e Ouvi Atualização
em Laringologia e Voz. Revinter: Rio de Janeiro; 1998. pp. 114–120.
16 Hirano M, Yoshida T, Tanaka S, Hibi S. Sulcus vocalis: functional aspects.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1990; 99:679–683.
17 Giovanni A, Chanteret C, Lagier A. Sulcus vocalis: a review. European
 archives of oto-rhino-laryngology: official journal of the European Federation
of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS): affiliated with the German
Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. Head Neck Surg 2007; 264:337–344.
Excellent review paper with the most important information on sulcus.
18 Luchsinger R, Arnold GE. Vocal disorders of constitutional origin: dysplastic
dysphonia. Voice–speech–language. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Pub-
lishing; 1965. pp. 167–175.
19 Pontes P, Behlau M, Gonçalves MIR. Minor structural alterations of the larynx:
basic aspects (in Portuguese). Acta AWHO 1994; 2:175–185.
20 De Biase NG, Pontes PA. Blood vessels of vocal folds: a videolaryngoscopic
study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008; 134:720–724.
21 Pontes P, Goncalves M, Behlau M. Vocal cover minor structural alterations:
diagnostic errors. Phonoscope 1999; 2:175–185.
22 Nakayama M, Ford CN, Brandenburg JH, Bless DM. Sulcus vocalis in
laryngeal cancer: a histopathologic study. Laryngoscope 1994; 104:16–24.
23 Pérouse R, Coulombeau B. The so-called vocal cord striae: anatomoclinical
aspects (in French). Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol 2005; 126:301–304.
24 Witzig E, Cornut G, Bouchayer M. Anatomoclinical study and treatment of the
epidermoid cyst and vocal cord sulcus: review of 157 cases (in French). Lês
cahiers d’ORL 1983; 47:765–778.
25 Remacle M, Lawson G, Watelet JB. Carbon dioxide laser microsurgery of
benign vocal fold lesions: indications, techniques, and results in 251 patients.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1999; 108:156–164.
26 Sataloff RT, Spiegel JR, Hawkshaw MJ. Vocal fold scar. Ear Nose Throat J
1997; 76:776.
27 Hsiung M-W, Kang B-H, Pai L, et al. Combination of fascia transplantation and
fat injection into the vocal fold for sulcus vocalis: long-term results. Ann Otol
Rhinol Laryngol 2004; 113:359–366.
28 Sataloff RT, Hawkshaw MJ, Divi V, Heman-Ackah YD. Voice surgery. Otolar-
 yngol Clin North Am 2007; 40:1151–1183; ix.
A detailed and comprehensive article on voice surgery.
29 Tsunoda K, Kondou K, Kaga K, et al. Autologous transplantation of fascia into
the vocal fold: long-term result of type-1 transplantation and the future.
Laryngoscope 2005; 115:1–10.
30 Zeitels SM, Mauri M, Dailey SH. Medialization laryngoplasty with Gore-Tex for
voice restoration secondary to glottal incompetence: indications and obser-
vations. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2003; 112:180–184.
31 Isshiki N, Okamura H, Ishikawa T. Thyroplasty type I (lateral compression) for
dysphonia due to vocal cord paralysis or atrophy. Acta Otolaryngol 1975;
80:465–473.
32 Su C-Y, Tsai S-S, Chiu J-F, Cheng C-A. Medialization laryngoplasty with strap
muscle transposition for vocal fold atrophy with or without sulcus vocalis.
Laryngoscope 2004; 114:1106–1112.
 520 Laryngology and bronchoesophagology
33 Grellet M, Carneiro CG, Aguiar LN, et al. Pediculous graft technique for sulcus
vocalis correction (in Portuguese). Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol 2002; 68:75–
79.
34 Pontes P, Behlau M. Treatment of sulcus vocalis: auditory perceptual and
acoustical analysis of the slicing mucosa surgical technique. J Voice 1993;
7:365–376.
35 Gama A, Becker C, Pontes P. Treatment of iatrogenic vocal fold scar post-
microsurgery for minor structural alteration (in Portuguese). O Melhor que
Vi e Ouvi III, Atualização em Laringe e Voz. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2001.
pp. 117–124.
36 Macedo Filho E, Caldart A, Macedo C, et al. Inner section of the vocal
ligament: new technique for sulcus vocalis treatment (in Portuguese). Arq Int
Otorrinolaringol 2007; 11:254–259.
37 Welham NV, Dailey SH, Ford CN, Bless DM. Voice handicap evaluation of
patients with pathologic sulcus vocalis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2007;
116:411–417.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
38 Gasparini G, Behlau M, Hogikyan ND. Quality of life and voice: study of a
Brazilian population using the voice-related quality of life measure. Folia
Phoniatr Logop 2007; 59:286–296.
39 Behlau M, Oliveira G, Santos LDMAD, Ricarte A. Validation in Brazil
of dysphonia impact self-assessment protocols (in Portuguese). Pró-Fono
Revista de Atualização Cientı́fica 2009; 21:326–332.
40 Oliveira G, Behlau M, Santos I. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the
voice handicap index into Brazilian Portuguese. J Voice 2010 [Epub ahead of
print].
41 Epstein R, Hirani SP, Stygall J, Newman SP. How do individuals cope with
voice disorders? Introducing the Voice Disability Coping Questionnaire.
J Voice 2009; 23:209–217.
42 Behlau M, Murry T. Voice therapy for benign vocal fold lesions and scars in
singers and actors. In: Benninger M, Murry T, editors. The performer’s voice.
San Diego: Plural; 2006. pp. 179–194.