Dislocation of the arytenoid cartilage is an usual laryngeal injury that can occur following blunt trauma or medical instrumentation to the laryngeal cavity, for example, after endotracheal intubation. In past reports, the diagnosis of arytenoid dislocation was usually made clinically and using a laryngoscope. The utility of CT imaging in the diagnosis of arytenoid dislocation was reported. Electromyography of the intrinsic laryngeal muscle was also described as a useful diagnostic examination to rule out neurogenic arytenoid cartilage dysfunction, such as recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. However, it was very difficult to perform an electromyographic examination of the intrinsic laryngeal muscle and to understand the reciprocal positions of the laryngeal cartilage from CT imaging for general otolaryngologists. Additionally, a means of distinguishing whether the arytenoid dislocation was the anterior type or the posterior type, and to reduce the arytenoid dislocation according to the dislocated type, has not been established. Thus, it is necessary to establish an effective diagnostic protocol that does not require the patient's effort or cause physical damage.
First, we made the morphological observations of the laryngeal cavity for a model of arytenoid dislocation extracted and prepared from human cadaver. The model of the anterior dislocation of the arytenoid cartilage demonstrated that the vocal fold of the affected side was flaccid and the arytenoid cartilage was displaced high-laterally, with an abnormal medial projection of the vocal process on the adductive position of the arytenoid cartilage when the muscular process of the arytenoid cartilage was pulled along the lateral cricoarytenoid muscle. The model of the posterior dislocation of the arytenoid cartilage demonstrated that the vocal fold was prolonged tensely and that the arytenoid cartilage was displaced high-laterally in the adductive position of the arytenoid cartilage with a more tensed vocal fold when the muscular process of the arytenoid cartilage was pulled along the lateral cricoarytenoid muscle.
Using the above-mentioned basic morphological observations, we next studied retrospectively the clinical examinations of the patients diagnosed as having arytenoid dislocation (anterior type: 10 cases, posterior type: 6 cases). The video-fiberscopic findings showed the following. For the anteriorly dislocated patients, the vocal fold was flaccid and made more flaccid on phonatory movement with the abnormal medial projection of the vocal process. For the posteriorly dislocated patients, the vocal fold was prolonged tensely and made more so on phonatory movement. The x-ray video-fluorography of the larynx on repetitive phonation /he/ showed an abnormally high and diagonal displacement of the vocal fold on the dislocated side with the upper structure of the arytenoid cartilage in both types of arytenoid dislocation. Palpating the cricoarytenoid joint showed abnormal swelling with tenderness at the lesion for the posteriorly dislocated patients, but not for anteriorly dislocated patients. Sagittal CT imaging at the level of the posterior cricoarytenoid ligament indicated the condition of the dislocated arytenoid cartilage. At others level, the condition of the arytenoid cartilage could not be seen clearly. Horizontal and coronal CT imaging did not show the dislocated arytenoid cartilage clearly either.
From these findings, we concluded that the best way to diagnose arytenoid dislocation is as follows. First, x-ray video-fluorography of the larynx on repetitive phonation should be taken to detect both types of arytenoid dislocation. Then, laryngeal fiberscopic findings and palpation of the cricoarytenoid joint should be examined to distinguish whether the arytenoid cartilage is dislocated anteriorly or posteriorly.
View full abstract