158 CHAPTER 7 When performing a subgroup analysis by splitting the original long-term group into medium-term (from one up to three years; n=16) and long-term (more than three years; n=26), there was no significant difference between VAS at medium-term or long-term when compared to measurements at 32 weeks (mean difference +7.6, CI 6.3 to -6.3, p = 0.256; +8.8, CI -3.6 – +21.3, p = 0.153). Secondary outcomes Long-term 2-DL effect on drooling severity and drooling frequency corresponded to VAS measurements with a decrease in DS and DF after 2-DL. Long-term DS was significantly lower than DS at 32 weeks (p = 0.001). When subdividing long-term data into medium-term (from one up to three years) and long-term (more than three years), both DS at medium-term and long-term were significantly lower than DS at 32 weeks (p = 0.036; p = 0.010). Correlation between VAS and time after 2-DL. The difference between the longterm VAS minus 32 weeks VAS in the total group was not associated with the period of time to the long-term follow-up (R2 Linear = 0.008, p = 0.633). Additional treatment for drooling. From the 42 patients that filled out the survey, 14 received additional treatment, 13 surgical (table 1). Subsequent therapeutic interventions were determined based on the opinion of the team and wish of patient and caregivers. There was no significant age difference between the nonreintervention and the reintervention group (mean difference 0.9, p = 0.414, CI 1.3 to -3.1), and no significant difference in reintervention rate between the patients with or without anteflexion (p = 0.821). The reintervention rate was non-significantly higher amongst patients with dysarthria (p = 0.075).14 From the four patients that received 2-DL with ligatures instead of clips, three underwent subsequent treatment (all submandibular gland extirpation (SMGE), one also glycopyrrolate as an anticholinergic drug).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw