Role of Videolaryngostroboscopy in the diagnosis of dysphonic patients with normal fiberoptic laryngoscopy Role of Videolaryngostroboscopy in the diagnosis of dysphonic patients with normal fiberoptic laryngoscopy

Main Article Content

Sajad Younis Al-Helo
Ahmed Mohammad Al-Safi
Rahma Agab Aljanabi


Stroboscopy, Videolaryngoscopy, Fiberoptic laryngoscopy, Dysphonia


Background: Dysphonia is altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs people’s quality of life. It is a very common complaint affecting nearly one-third of a population at some point in their life and could be caused by infection, tumor, trauma, vocal cord paralysis, etc.

Indirect mirror or endoscopic laryngoscopy is used to assess the laryngeal condition in dysphonic patients seeking mainly for the cause, but frequently the findings were normal or unremarkable.

Videolaryngoscopy (VLS) is very useful in dysphonic patients who have an otherwise normal indirect or flexible laryngoscopic examination. In addition to providing information regarding vocal fold vibrations, the image obtained through VLS can be magnified to make a more detailed assessment of the vocal cord anatomy than is possible with rigid of flexible laryngoscopy.


Objective of study: To assess the videolaryngostroboscopic findings in dysphonic patients with normal fiber-optic laryngoscopy.

Patient & Method: A cross-sectional study, Fifty patients were included in the study; They had complained of dysphonia, and the fiber-optic laryngoscopic examination was normal. Videostroboscopy were obtained for all patients to assess vocal fold vibration and seek any abnormal findings.

Results: A total of 50 patients were enrolled in this study. Regarding the stroboscopic findings, 42% of the patients were normal, 15 (30%) had early soft singer’s nodules, 6 patients (12%) had intracordal lesions, 4 patients (8%)had vocal cord polypoidal changes, 2 patients (4%) had presbylaryngis, and the other 2 patients (4%) had sulcus vocalis.

Conclusion: VLS is beneficial in detecting vocal cord lesions in patients with normal fiber-optic laryngoscopy. A high proportion (more than half) of dysphonic patients with normal fiber-optic laryngoscopy had abnormal findings.

Keywords: Stroboscopy, Videolaryngoscopy, Fiberoptic laryngoscopy, Dysphonia

Abstract 44 |


. Hirano M. Phonosurgery: basic and clinical investigations. Otol (Fukuoka). 1975;21:239-42. available from:
2. Jean-Pierre Jeannon and Enyinnaya Ofo, Scott-Brown . Otorhinolaryngology—head and neck surgery: assessment and examination of the larynx . 61(3):911.
3. Lalwani AK. Current Diagnosis & Treatment Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery. 3rd ed. Lalwani AK, editor. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2012. pp:978
4. Yasir Lafta Hassoun, Karrar Mohsin Shaheed, and Ehsan Hameed Al-Turaihy. Videostroboscopic evaluation of the vocal cords before and after microlaryngeal phonosurgery for benign lesions. 2018 Feb.
5. Mete A, Akbudak İH. Functional Anatomy and Physiology of Airway. In: Erbay RH, editor. Tracheal Intubation [Internet]. London: IntechOpen; 2018. p. 318–26. Available from:
6. von Leden H, Moore P, Timcke R. Laryngeal vibrations: Measurements of the glottic wave: Part III. The pathologic larynx. AMA Archives of Otolaryngology. 1960 Jan 1;71(1):16-35..
7. von Leden H. The electronic synchrono-stroboscopy: its value for practicing laryngologist, Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 1961;70:881–893.
8. Robert W. Bastin, Cumming’s Otolaryngology, Head-Neck Surg: Benign vocal fold mucosal disorder. 6th ed., 2015; Chapter 61, pp:900 .
9. Katherine A. Kendall. Introduction to videostroboscopy: laryngeal evaluation indirect laryngoscopy to high-speed digital imaging, 1st ed. 2010. Chapter 10, 91–100.

10. Stachler RJ, Francis DO, Schwartz SR, Damask CC, Digoy GP, Krouse HJ, et al.. Clinical practice guideline: hoarseness (dysphonia)(update). otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. 2018 Mar;158 (1_suppl):S1-42.
11. Printza A. Stroboscopy for benign laryngeal pathology in evidence-based health care. Hippokratia. 2012 Oct–Dec;16(4):324–328.
12. Spiegel JR, Sataloff RT, Hawkshaw MJ. Strobovideolaryngoscopy: results and clinical value. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 1991 Sep;100(9):725-7.

13. Casiano RR, Zaveri V, Lundy DS. Efficacy of videostroboscopy in the diagnosis of voice disorders. Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery. 1992 Jul;107(1):95-100.

14. Banjara H, Mungutwar V, Singh D, Gupta A, Singh S. Demographic and videostroboscopic assessment of vocal pathologies. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery. 2012 Jun 1;64(2):150-7.
15. Woo P, Colton R, Casper J, Brewer D. Diagnostic value of stroboscopic examination in hoarse patients. Journal of voice. 1991 Jan 1;5(3):231-8.
16 Teitler N. Examiner bias: influence of patient history on perceptual ratings of videostroboscopy. Journal of Voice. 1995 Mar 1;9(1):95-105.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > >>