A comparative analysis of laryngeal nerve damage in patients with idiopathic vocal cord paralysis exhibiting different paralytic sides

Abstract Objective To assess the extent of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) and superior laryngeal nerve (SLN) damage in patients with idiopathic vocal cord paralysis (IVCP) exhibiting different paralytic sides. Methods A total of 84 IVCP cases were evaluated using stroboscopic laryngoscopy, voice analysis, and laryngeal electromyography (LEMG). The results were compared between patients with left‐sided paralysis and right‐sided paralysis based on different disease courses (less than or more than 3 months). Results Initially, the average age and disease progression of IVCP patients were found to be similar regardless of the side of paralysis (p > .05). Additionally, there were no significant variations in voice indicators, such as MPT, DSI, and VHI, between IVCP patients with left and right vocal cord paralysis (p > .05). Furthermore, no disparities were detected in the latencies and amplitudes of the paralyzed RLN and SLN, as well as the durations and amplitudes of the action potentials in the paralyzed TM and PCM, among IVCP patients with left and right vocal cord paralysis (p > .05). Notably, the amplitudes of the left paralytic CM were significantly lower than those of the right paralytic CM (0.45 vs. 0.53, Z = −2.013, p = .044). In addition, no disparities were observed in APDs and amplitudes between the ipsilateral PCM and TM, either for patients with left or right vocal fold paralysis (p > .05). Finally, all the IVCP patients were subdivided into two subgroups according to different disease course (less than or more than 3 months), and in each subgroup, the comparison of voice indicators and LEMG results in IVCP patients with left or right vocal fold paralysis were similar with the above findings (p > .05). Conclusion Overall, the degree of RLN and SLN damage appeared to be similar in IVCP patients with left and right vocal cord paralysis, provided that the disease course was comparable. Level of Evidence 4.