|
|
||||||||
Laryngeal and Speech Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Laryngeal adductor responses (LAR) close the airway in response to stimulation of peripheral afferents in the superior laryngeal nerve. Although both mucosal afferents and proprioceptive receptors are present in the larynx, their relative contribution for reflex elicitation is unknown. Our purpose was to determine which receptor types are of importance in eliciting the LAR. A servomotor with displacement feedback was used to deliver punctate displacements to the body of the arytenoid cartilage and overlying mucosa on each side of the larynx in eight anesthetized cats. The same displacements were delivered both before and after surgical excision of the overlying mucosa. With the mucosa intact, early short-latency component R1 LAR responses recorded from the thyroarytenoid muscles were frequent (ipsilateral > 92%, contralateral > 95%). After the mucosa was removed, the LAR became infrequent (<3%) and was reduced in amplitude in both the ipsilateral and contralateral thyroarytenoid muscle recording sites (P < 0.0005). These findings demonstrate that mucosal mechanoreceptors and not proprioceptive afferents contribute to the elicitation of LAR responses in the cat.
sensorimotor; electromyogram; servomotor displacement; thyroarytenoid
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
PERIPHERAL AFFERENTS IN THE mammalian larynx provide a variety of physiological inputs through specialized end organs, including pneumoreceptor, chemoreceptor, thermoreceptor, proprioceptive, and mechanoreceptive afferents (14, 31-33, 35, 51-53). These different afferent populations are contained in the internal branch of the superior laryngeal nerve (ISLN) and are thought to modulate activity in the laryngeal motoneuron pools during cough, swallow, and vocalization (4, 44, 49). Although extensive research has been conducted on the role of afferents contained in the mucosa on laryngeal control, less is known about the role of proprioceptive joint and muscle afferents on laryngeal protective reflexes.
Mechanical indentations or vibratory stimulation to the mucosa of the cat larynx have been demonstrated to elicit responses in superior laryngeal nerve fibers (8, 9). Similar investigations have confirmed that the activity in these receptors is well correlated with light touch, air pressure changes, laryngeal muscle contraction, and cartilage displacement in animal models (6, 13, 26, 34) and are in evidence in the human (2). Davis and Nail (8) found that the glottis is densely populated with low-threshold, rapidly adapting (RA) mechanoreceptors of small receptive field size. The largest proportion of these RA afferents were in the region surrounding the arytenoid cartilage in the cat (8, 21). The arytenoid cartilages adjust their position to produce vocal fold closure during cough, swallow, and vocalization. Recordings have demonstrated that these receptors provide movement-related afferent feedback during evoked vocalization in the cat (44), are contained in the ISLN, and contribute to muscle activity during vocalization.
The laryngeal adductor response (LAR) is a rapid burst of activity in the thyroarytenoid (TA) muscles, which can assist in closure of the larynx in response to ISLN stimulation. The spatiotemporal properties of the LAR have been studied in both humans and animals by using a variety of stimulus conditions (17, 37, 40, 50). Besides the well-known role of the LAR for airway closure (37), it has been suggested that this sensorimotor pathway is also involved in regulating the stiffness of the internal laryngeal musculature during vocalization in mammals (1, 10, 48, 49). The LAR pathway is believed to be mediated by afferents from neurons within the nodose ganglion that project to the interstitial subnucleus of the tractus solitarius (11). Interneuronal projections may pass through the lateral tegmental field to the laryngeal motor neurons in the nucleus ambiguus (5, 7, 44).
The purpose of this study was to determine the relative contribution of mucosal mechanoreceptor afferents and cricoarytenoid joint proprioceptors in the elicitation of the short-latency component of the LAR. A surgically performed mucosal peel was used to assess the relative contribution of surface mechanoreceptors vs. deep proprioceptive receptors in eliciting LAR responses in the anesthetized cat. Mucosal excision was used because of possible variations in the degree of tissue diffusion and the duration of effect when applying lidocaine to the mucosa. Access to the vocal folds and the arytenoid region was possible via a carefully performed midline anterior incision through the thyroid and cricoid cartilages. Because the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), which innervates the laryngeal adductor muscles, enters the larynx posteriorly and from an inferior direction, the anterior midline incision of the thyroid cartilage did not interfere with the course of the RLN innervating the TA muscle. Demonstration that the RLN was intact, as evidenced by TA muscle LAR responses, was required before beginning the study. In addition, it was assumed that because the afferents from the region beneath the vocal folds, which join the recurrent nerve, do so in the posterior inferior region (51-54), disturbance of these fibers by an anterior midline section through the thyroid cartilage was unlikely. This approach for accessing the vocal folds also allowed us to study the spatial distribution and displacement characteristics of stimulation that evoked the LAR.
| |
METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Subjects and surgical procedures. Eight cats of either sex were used (weight range: 2.6-4.4 kg). All care and treatment procedures were in compliance with and in accordance to the rules and regulations of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Intramural Program (National Institutes of Health Manual 3040-2, revised 1999). Before study, each animal had a cephalic vein port placed in the forelimb for intravenous administration and was preanesthetized with acepromazine (0.1 mg/kg im). Deep anesthesia was induced with a mixture of 3-5% isoflurane and 100% oxygen (3 l/min) delivered via a ventilator into an enclosed induction chamber. After anesthesia to effect, the animal was removed from the induction chamber, laid supine on the surgical carriage, and fitted with a nose cone to support ventilation with 0.5-1% isoflurane (2 l/min of oxygen), and the skull was fixed to a stereotaxic frame with ear bars.
A tracheotomy was performed at a level superior to the thoracic inlet to provide an independent airway and to allow for discrete stimulation to the laryngeal area without producing airway interruption or stimulating pressure receptors within the lungs. After placement of the endotracheal cannula,
-chloralose (40 mg/kg) was administered intravenously to effect during gradual withdrawal of isoflurane to
engender long-lasting anesthesia. Spontaneous breathing was supported
throughout the remainder of the protocol via the endotracheal cannula
(100% oxygen at 2 l/min). Core body temperature was monitored and
maintained between 36 and 38°C by using a warm-water circulating blanket. Vital signs, including heart rate, respiratory rate, PCO2, oxygen saturation, and checks for the
lack of a withdrawal response to painful stimuli, were recorded every
30 min. A pediatric-size adhesive grounding electrode was affixed to
the shaved dorsal spine region of the animal.
To expose the laryngeal region for mechanical stimulation, a midline
separation of the thyroid and cricoid lamina was performed. The free
ends of the divided cartilaginous tissue were sutured and secured to
the stereotaxic frame to maintain the larynx in a constant open
position. Bipolar stainless steel bifilar hooked-wire electrodes
contained in a 27-gauge hypodermic needle were inserted into the
anterior portion of the TA muscles bilaterally under visual guidance.
The lower abdomen was opened to visualize the inferior surface of the
diaphragm, and a bipolar hooked wire electrode was inserted. The
electromyographic (EMG) signal of the diaphragm was routed to an audio
speaker and used to time the delivery of the mechanical stimulus during
the expiratory phase of respiration to control for respiratory
modulation of the LAR. The exposed mucosa was kept moist by
administration of physiological saline periodically throughout the experiment.
Mechanical stimuli.
A custom-designed servomotor operating under displacement feedback was
used to deliver punctate mechanical transients to three different
locations along the exposed vocal fold margin: 1) the tissues encompassing the body of the arytenoid cartilage, 2)
the area of the vocal process, and 3) the anterior aspect of
the TA muscle (Fig. 1). A 5-ms
Transistor-Transistor Logic pulse produced by a Master 8 pulse
generator provided the control signal to the servomotor's controller.
The stimulator system consisted of a high-performance audio speaker
with a permanently affixed and rigid shaft extending from the
speaker's diaphragm. Displacement of the shaft was monitored by an
optoelectrical sensor located distal to the motor and a servo-feedback
circuit to the speaker driver. The distal end of the rigid shaft was
fitted with a miniature load cell (Schaevitz Sensors, Hampton, VA)
serially coupled to a probe tip. The probe tip consisted of a 30-gauge
hypodermic needle hub with its cannula trimmed to <2 mm in length. The
trimmed cannula was inserted into the mucosa and operated to anchor the probe tip securely in place at each stimulus site. After cannula insertion, the probe was carefully advanced with the use of a micrometer until the flat and blunt surface of the hypodermic's plastic hub contacted the tissue surface. During placement of the probe
tip over the arytenoid, the 2-mm trimmed cannula was inserted through
the mucosa and anchored into the body of the arytenoid cartilage. The
probe tip's loading was monitored and controlled throughout the
experiment for all stimulation sites (preload bias of 30-40 g for
all experimental conditions). The direction of stimulation was
generally posterolateral.
|
|
Experimental conditions.
The effects of three different experimental conditions on the
ipsilateral and contralateral TA response were studied: 1) a stimulation site condition comparing evoked responses to the same displacement over the arytenoid body, the vocal process, and the TA
muscle (on the same vocal fold margin); 2) a displacement
magnitude condition comparing evoked responses to different mucosal
displacements over the right and/or left arytenoid body, and, lastly;
3) a mucosal peel condition that sought to compare LAR
responses to the same displacement of the arytenoid body with and
without the overlying mucosa intact. Six of the eight animals received
each of the three experimental conditions (Table
1). The remaining two animals received
only one or two of the three experimental conditions. For the
stimulation site condition, all three loci were on the same side of the
larynx. For the displacement magnitude and mucosal peel conditions,
results of displacement of an arytenoid cartilage were compared on one
side of the larynx. Given the delicate nature and sensitivity of vocal
fold tissues to external manipulations, the order of data acquisition
was designed to maximize data collection and minimize physical damage
at each stimulus site. Therefore, the site condition was typically
performed first on one side, followed by the displacement magnitude
condition on the opposite side, with the mucosal peel condition
performed on the same side as the displacement magnitude condition. For
several of the animals, we were able to complete a second set of
displacement magnitude and mucosal peel experiments on the remaining
intact arytenoid body after completion of the former two experimental
conditions (Table 1).
|
Data analysis. Digitized signals were visually inspected and marked by use of a customized routine written in MATLAB (v 5.3). The servomotor displacement signal was used to synchronize the graphical display to aid in identification of the evoked TA responses, bilaterally (Fig. 2). Onset and offset points were marked on the data records and were saved to an ASCII output file. The mean level of rectified TA EMG activity during a 20-ms period before stimulus onset was used to compute and subtract the baseline activity from the response. The initial deflection of the TA EMG response from baseline was identified as the onset of the short-latency component of the TA response, referred to as R1 (~17 ms after the servomotor displacement signal). Response offset was marked as the point when the EMG signal returned to baseline and remained stable for at least 20 ms. Automated signal-processing routines were later used to compute various measures from each marked R1 component of the TA signal, including 1) response latency, 2) response duration, and 3) the total area under the curve (mV × ms), as a measure of response magnitude. The mean baseline was multiplied by the R1 duration and subtracted from the total R1 integral to correct for differences in overall muscle activity independent from the response.
Repeated-measures ANOVAs (
= 0.05) were conducted separately
for the site and growth curve conditions using the calculated R1
integral values as the dependent measure. For the site condition, the
main effects of stimulus location and side of response were tested
along with the interaction of location and side. For the growth curve
condition, the main effects of stimulus magnitude and side of response
were tested along with the interaction of magnitude and side. Finally,
for the mucosal peel condition, mean response rates were calculated by
dividing the total number of evoked TA responses by the total number of
tokens presented for each animal in the pre- and postpeel condition.
Any EMG activity beyond a latency of ~10 ms that differed from the
pretrigger baseline and that had a clear onset/offset location was
measured and counted as an evoked TA response. The frequencies of LAR
responses were compared using a repeated-measures ANOVA. For this
analysis, the main effects of peel condition (pre- vs. postpeel) and
side of response were tested along with the interaction effect of peel condition and side. Post hoc testing used Tukey's test for
simultaneous pairwise comparisons to examine any omnibus significant
main effects after each of the repeated-measures analyses.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Site of stimulation effects.
As shown in Fig. 3, the magnitude of the
LAR evoked by a constant servomotor displacement of ~350-400
µm increased significantly as mechanical inputs were delivered closer
to the body of the arytenoid cartilage for both ipsilateral and
contralateral recording sites (F = 62.96, P < 0.0005). The main effect of response side (ipsi-
vs. contralateral) was nonsignificant (F = 3.09, P = 0.139), as was the interaction effect for site of
stimulation by response side (F = 2.03, P = 0.183). Post hoc testing for the significant main
effect of stimulation site revealed that the pairwise comparisons of
arytenoid body stimulation with vocal process stimulation and with TA
muscle stimulation were significantly different (P = 0.0024 and P = 0.004, respectively). The pairwise
comparison between vocal process stimulation and TA muscle stimulation
was nonsignificant (P = 0.74).
|
Stimulation magnitude effects.
As expected, the magnitude of the evoked LAR changed systematically as
a function of the displacement level delivered to the body of the
arytenoid cartilage (F = 26.91, P < 0.0005) (Fig. 4). The main effect for
stimulation magnitude was significant (F = 26.91, P < 0.0005). The main effect for response side (ipsi- vs. contralateral) was nonsignificant (F = 2.96, P = 0.123), as was the interaction effect for
stimulation magnitude by response side (F = 1.77, P = 0.203). Post hoc testing for the significant main
effect of stimulation magnitude revealed that the comparison between
the highest displacement magnitude vs. the lowest displacement level
was significant (P < 0.0005) and therefore accounted
for the significant omnibus F value. Pairwise comparison of
the highest displacement magnitude with the middle level was
nonsignificant (P = 0.106), as was the comparison
between the middle displacement magnitude vs. the lowest magnitude
(P = 0.1082).
|
Mucosal peel effects.
Stimulation of the arytenoid mucosa during the prepeel condition with a
325-µm displacement consistently evoked the short-latency component
of the LAR, bilaterally. The mean percent response rate (pooled across
all animals and response sites) was 93.7% (225 responses out of 240 tokens). In contrast, after the mucosa was surgically removed, the LAR
mean percent response rate dropped to 1.2%, bilaterally (3 responses
out of 237 tokens). A repeated-measures ANOVA (
= 0.05)
comparing the mean response frequency for each animal pre- and postpeel
on each side was significant (F = 713.36, P < 0.0005). The pronounced effect of the mucosal peel
condition can be clearly seen in Fig. 5,
bilaterally. The main effect for response side was nonsignificant
(F = 0.01, P = 0.922), as was the
response side by peel condition interaction (F = 0.68, P = 0.443).
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The most important finding in this experiment was that surgical removal of the mucosa overlying the arytenoid body effectively abolished the LAR response in both the ipsilateral and contralateral TA muscles in the cat. The mean percent response rate dropped dramatically immediately after the mucosal peel, and the area was restimulated with the same displacement magnitude as in the prepeel condition. It appears, therefore, that cricoarytenoid joint afferents do not contribute to the elicitation of the LAR. This conclusion is further strengthened in that servomotor displacement was readily observed to move the arytenoid cartilage and therefore would have activated cricoarytenoid joint receptors during both the pre- and postpeel conditions. Thus it is suggested that mucosal mechanoreceptors overlying the arytenoid complex represent the dominant source of somatosensory input needed to evoke the LAR in the cat.
Our investigation also found that the contribution of mucosal mechanoreceptors for eliciting the LAR was greatest in the posterior glottis. When the same displacement was administered to the mucosa overlying the thyroarytenoid muscle, no LAR responses occurred, and few occurred when stimulation was over the vocal process (Fig. 4). Because the magnitude of the reflex response grew with increased displacements of the arytenoid, the excitability of laryngeal motoneurons may be influenced by mechanical stimuli to this region.
Collectively, these data are consistent with others' results. Immunohistochemical staining of intraepithelial nerve fibers in the epithelium of the laryngeal mucosa showed sharp territorial differences between the anterior and posterior regions of the glottis (20). These authors found that the posterior glottis contained the heaviest density of labeled fibers and suggested that this disproportionate distribution of fibers in the posterior glottis may be important for the perception of stimuli and the elicitation of reflexes in the larynx. Microneurographic recordings of ISLN afferent fibers in the cat by Davis and Nail (8) also showed greater density levels in the posterior glottis with a disproportionate number of RA mechanoreceptive afferents with small receptive fields over the arytenoid complex. Slowly adapting receptor profiles were also found but primarily populated the lumen of the larynx and to a lesser extent the aryepiglottic fold, the vocal process, and the base of the epiglottis. More importantly, Davis and Nail demonstrated that laryngeal mucosal receptors were exquisitely sensitive to both the static and dynamic features of indentation and were capable of faithfully after vibratory inputs up to 400 Hz. Given that the posterior glottal region normally undergoes rapid biomechanical adjustments for airway protection, a high distribution of afferents and their apparent high-frequency sensitivity in this region may provide for precise monitoring of sensory events during rapid laryngeal control. These data, in conjunction with our findings, suggest that mucosal afferents may effectively contribute to laryngeal sensorimotor responses. In addition, as the arytenoid cartilages are moved, the mechanoreceptors within the mucosa overlying them may operate as a primary source of sensory input necessary for laryngeal motor control.
An understanding of the distribution and integrity of ISLN-mediated afference in the human is of importance to normal and disordered laryngeal behavior such as chronic cough and irritable laryngeal disorders (22). Sensory abnormalities due to disease or injury of the human larynx have been suggested to form the basis for patient complaints such as foreign body sensations (22) and spasmodic dysphonia (18). Abnormally heightened responses to typical laryngeal stimulation may be life threatening when laryngospasm causes airway obstruction and prolonged apnea (23-25, 39, 46). Unfortunately, few physiological studies address the contribution and central effects of general somatic afferents on laryngeal motoneuron pool excitability during coordinative actions in the human larynx. Behavioral data in humans suggest that mucosal afferents are sensitive to physiologically relevant inputs such as airflow, air pressure, and touch (2, 15, 36). Furthermore, Sanders and Mu (29) studied the territory supplied by the ISLN in excised human larynges and found a rich distribution of mechanoreceptive endings to the ventricular and vocal folds, the mucosa overlying the arytenoids, the posterior glottis, and the joint capsule of the cricoarytenoid joint. Similar distributions of ISLN afferent endings have been described for the cat larynx (54), suggesting that the cat may be an accurate model for testing the sensitivity of different receptor types contributing to movement dynamics during coordinated laryngeal behaviors.
Although our investigation has detailed the importance of mucosal afferents for evoking the LAR in the cat, this is not the only channel through which the LAR may be elicited. Stimulation of chemoreceptors, which are scattered throughout the laryngeal complex, will produce central apnea, alter respiratory rhythms, and elicit the LAR (6, 30, 47). Also, it is likely that other classes of receptors, such as joint or other mechanical receptors in muscle, were active during mucosal displacement. Although the LAR was not elicited after removal of the mucosa, these other receptors may have continued to be active. Without microneurography, however, the degree to which these afferents continued to be active after mucosal removal is not known.
The degree to which muscle spindles provide feedback to the motor neuron pool and alter muscle tone is unknown for the larynx. Few if any muscles spindles have been found in the intrinsic laryngeal muscles of primates and humans (3, 16, 19), and they seem to be absent in the cat. The extent to which muscle spindles are distributed and functionally active within the TA muscle of the human (3, 28) remains controversial. Because species may differ in the presence of muscle spindles and their possible physiological role in laryngeal control, caution must be taken in generalizing our results to the human.
Regardless of these limitations, this study has provided data on the functional contribution and spatial sensitivity of mucosal mechanoreceptor afferents for the elicitation of the LAR in the cat. Continuing to differentiate the functional effects of each receptor class contained within the ISLN may help clarify the specific channels through which central changes may occur in humans with laryngeal disorders. This information is considered to have potential for understanding the pathophysiology of various sensorimotor laryngeal disorders.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
Gratitude is expressed to Erich Luschei for technical assistance and advice, Frank Evans for the development of signal processing routines, and Carlos Cyrus for procedural support during data collection.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
This project was funded by the Intramural Program at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, The National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: R. D. Andreatta, Dept. of Communication Sciences and Disorders, 514 Aderhold Hall, The Univ. of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 (E-mail: andreatt{at}coe.uga.edu).
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
July 19, 2002;10.1152/japplphysiol.00417.2002
Received 13 May 2002; accepted in final form 17 July 2002.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1.
Adzaku, FK,
and
Wyke B.
Laryngeal subglottic mucosal reflexogenic influences on laryngeal muscle activity.
Folia Phoniatr Logop
34:
57-64,
1982.
2.
Aviv, JE.
Sensory discrimination in the larynx and hypopharynx.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
116:
331-334,
1997[Web of Science][Medline].
3.
Baken, RJ,
and
Noback CR.
Neuromuscular spindles in intrinsic muscles of a human larynx.
J Speech Hear Res
14:
513-518,
1971[Web of Science][Medline].
4.
Barkmeier, JM,
Bielamowicz S,
Takeda N,
and
Ludlow CL.
Modulation of laryngeal responses to superior laryngeal nerve stimulation by volitional swallowing in awake humans.
J Neurophysiol
83:
1264-1272,
2000
5.
Beackstead, RM,
Morse JR,
and
Norgren R.
The nucleus of the solitary tract in the monkey: projections to the thalamus and brain stem nuclei.
J Comp Neurol
190:
259-282,
1980[Web of Science][Medline].
6.
Boushey, HA,
Richardson PS,
Widdicombe JG,
and
Wise JCM
The response of laryngeal afferent fibres to mechanical and chemical stimuli.
J Physiol
240:
153-175,
1974
7.
Bystrzycka, EK.
Afferent projections to the dorsal and ventral respiratory nuclei in the medulla oblongata of the cat studied by the horseradish peroxidase technique.
Brain Res
185:
59-66,
1980[Web of Science][Medline].
8.
Davis, PJ,
and
Nail BS.
Quantitative analysis of laryngeal mechanosensitivity in the cat and rabbit.
J Physiol
388:
467-485,
1987
9.
Davis, PJ,
and
Nail BS.
The sensitivity of laryngeal epithelial receptors to static and dynamic forms of mechanical stimulation.
In: Vocal Physiology: Voice Production, Mechanisms and Functions, edited by Fujimara O.. New York: Raven, 1988, p. 1-18.
10.
Jurgens, U,
and
Kirzinger A.
The laryngeal sensory pathway and its role in phonation. A brain lesioning study in the squirrel monkey.
Exp Brain Res
59:
118-124,
1985[Web of Science][Medline].
11.
Kalia, M,
and
Mesulam MM.
Brain stem projections of sensory and motor components of the vagus complex in the cat: I. The cervical vagus and nodose ganglion.
J Comp Neurol
193:
435-465,
1980[Web of Science][Medline].
12.
Karlsson, JA,
Sant'Ambrogio G,
and
Widdicombe J.
Afferent neural pathways in cough and reflex bronchoconstriction.
J Appl Physiol
65:
1007-1023,
1988
13.
Kirchner, JA,
and
Wyke B.
Afferent discharges from laryngeal articular mechanoreceptors.
Nature
205:
86-87,
1965[Medline].
14.
Kiyokawa, K.
Effects of intrinsic laryngeal muscles on the glottis: Experimental study of excised human larynges.
Otologia (Fukuoka) 33, Suppl
1:
183-217,
1987.
15.
Kuna, ST,
Woodson GE,
and
Sant'Ambrogio G.
Effect of laryngeal anesthesia on pulmonary function testing in normal subjects.
Am Rev Respir Dis
137:
656-661,
1988[Web of Science][Medline].
16.
Larson, C,
Sutton D,
and
Lindeman RC.
Muscle spindles in nonhuman primate laryngeal muscles.
Folia Primatol (Basel)
22:
315-323,
1974[Medline].
17.
Ludlow, CL,
Van Pelt F,
and
Koda J.
Characteristics of late responses to superior laryngeal nerve stimulation in humans.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol
101:
127-134,
1992[Web of Science][Medline].
18.
Ludlow, CL,
Schulz GM,
Yamashita T,
and
Deleyiannis FW.
Abnormalities in long latency responses to superior laryngeal nerve stimulation in adductor spasmodic dysphonia.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol
104:
928-935,
1995[Web of Science][Medline].
19.
Malannino, M.
Laryngeal neuromuscular spindles and their possible function.
Folia Phoniatr (Basel)
26:
291-292,
1974[Medline].
20.
Matsuo, H,
and
Shin T.
Distribution of intraepithelial nerve fibers in the feline glottis.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
111:
91-99,
1994[Web of Science][Medline].
21.
Miura, T,
Kaneko T,
Suzuki H,
Hayasaki K,
Mochida A,
Mitsuhashi T,
Homma S,
and
Nakajima Y.
Frequency characteristics and distribution of mechanoreceptors in the larynx.
In: Vocal Physiology: Voice Production, Mechanisms and Functions, edited by Fujimura O.. New York: Raven, 1988, p. 39-47.
22.
Morrison, M,
Rammage L,
and
Emami AJ.
The irritable larynx syndrome.
J Voice
13:
447-455,
1999[Web of Science][Medline].
23.
Rex, MAE
Studies on the nerve pathways involved in the laryngeal reflex (laryngospasm) in the cat.
Br J Anaesth
42:
1067-1071,
1970
24.
Rex, MAE
A review of the structural and functional basis of laryngospasm and a discussion of the nerve pathways involved in the reflex and its clinical significance in man and animals.
Br J Anaesth
42:
891-899,
1970
25.
Rex, MAE
Laryngospasm and respiratory changes in the cat produced by mechanical stimulation of the pharynx and respiratory tract: problems of intubation in the cat.
Br J Anaesth
43:
54-57,
1971
26.
Sampson, S,
and
Eyzaguirre C.
Some functional characteristics of mechanoreceptors in the larynx of the cat.
J Neurophysiol
27:
464-480,
1964
27.
Sanders, I,
Wu BL,
Mu L,
Li Y,
and
Biller HF.
The innervation of the human larynx.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
119:
934-939,
1993
28.
Sanders, I,
Han Y,
Wang J,
and
Biller H.
Muscle spindles are concentrated in the superior vocalis subcompartment of the human thyroarytenoid muscle.
J Voice
12:
7-16,
1998[Web of Science][Medline].
29.
Sanders, I,
and
Mu L.
Anatomy of the human internal superior laryngeal nerve.
Anat Rec
252:
646-656,
1998[Medline].
30.
Sant'Ambrogio, FB,
Tsubone H,
Mathew OP,
and
Sant'Ambrogio G.
Afferent activity in the external branch of the superior laryngeal and recurrent laryngeal nerves.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol
100:
944-950,
1991[Web of Science][Medline].
31.
Sant'Ambrogio, G.
Afferent pathways for the cough reflex.
Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir
23, Suppl10:
19s-23s,
1987[Medline].
32.
Sant'Ambrogio, G,
Anderson JW,
Sant'Ambrogio FB,
and
Mathew OP.
Response of laryngeal receptors to water solutions of different osmolality and ionic composition.
Respir Med
85, SupplA:
57-60,
1991[Medline].
33.
Sant'Ambrogio, G,
and
Mathew OP.
Laryngeal receptors and their reflex responses.
Clin Chest Med
7:
211-222,
1986[Web of Science][Medline].
34.
Sant'Ambrogio, G,
Mathew OP,
Fisher JT,
and
Sant'Ambrogio FB.
Laryngeal receptors responding to transmural pressure, airflow and local muscle activity.
Respir Physiol
54:
317-330,
1983[Web of Science][Medline].
35.
Sant'Ambrogio, G,
Sant'Ambrogio FB,
and
Mathew OP.
Effects of airway cooling on tracheal stretch receptors.
Respir Physiol
66:
205-214,
1986[Web of Science][Medline].
36.
Sant'Ambrogio, G,
and
Widdicombe J.
Reflexes from airway rapidly adapting receptors.
Respir Physiol
125:
33-45,
2001[Web of Science][Medline].
37.
Sasaki, CT,
and
Suzuki M.
Laryngeal reflexes in cat, dog, and man.
Arch Otolaryngol
102:
400-402,
1976
38.
Selbie, WS,
Zhang L,
Levine WS,
and
Ludlow CL.
Using joint geometry to determine the motion of the cricoarytenoid joint.
J Acoust Soc Am
103:
1115-1127,
1998[Web of Science][Medline].
39.
Sercarz, JA,
Nasri S,
Gerratt BR,
Fyfe ST,
and
Berke GS.
Recurrent laryngeal nerve afferents and their role in laryngospasm.
Am J Otolaryngol
16:
49-52,
1995[Web of Science][Medline].
40.
Sessle, BJ.
Presynaptic excitability changes induced in single laryngeal primary afferent fibres.
Brain Res
53:
333-342,
1973[Web of Science][Medline].
41.
Shiba, K,
Miura T,
Yuza J,
Sakamoto T,
and
Nakajima Y.
Laryngeal afferent inputs during vocalization in the cat.
Neuroreport
10:
987-991,
1999[Web of Science][Medline].
42.
Shiba, K,
Yoshida K,
and
Miura T.
Functional roles of the superior laryngeal nerve afferents in electrically induced vocalization in anesthetized cats.
Neurosci Res
22:
23-30,
1995[Web of Science][Medline].
43.
Shiba, K,
Yoshida K,
Nakajima Y,
and
Konno A.
Influences of laryngeal afferent inputs on intralaryngeal muscle activity during vocalization in the cat.
Neurosci Res
27:
85-92,
1997[Web of Science][Medline].
44.
Tanaka, Y,
Yoshida Y,
and
Hirano M.
CGRP-immunoreactive cells supplying laryngeal sensory nerve fibres in the cat's nodose ganglion.
J Laryngol Otol
107:
916-919,
1993[Web of Science][Medline].
45.
Wang, RC.
Three-dimensional analysis of cricoarytenoid joint motion.
Laryngoscope
108, Suppl86:
1-17,
1998[Web of Science][Medline].
46.
Wani, MK,
and
Woodson GE.
Paroxysmal laryngospasm after laryngeal nerve injury.
Laryngoscope
109:
694-697,
1999[Web of Science][Medline].
47.
Widdicombe, DM.
Upper airway reflexes.
Curr Opin Pulm Med
4:
376-382,
1998[Medline].
48.
Wyke, BD.
Laryngeal myotatic reflexes and phonation.
Folia Phoniatr Logop
26:
249-264,
1974.
49.
Wyke, BD.
Reflexogenic contributions to vocal fold control systems.
In: Vocal Fold Physiology: Biomechanics, Acoustics and Phonatory Control, edited by Titze IR,
and Schere RC.. Denver, CO: The Denver Center for the Performing Arts, 1983, p. 138-141.
50.
Yamashita, T,
Nash EA,
Tanaka Y,
and
Ludlow CL.
Effects of stimulus intensity on laryngeal long latency responses in awake humans.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
117:
521-529,
1997[Web of Science][Medline].
51.
Yoshida, Y,
Saito T,
Tanaka Y,
Hirano M,
Morimoto M,
and
Kanaseki T.
Laryngeal sensory innervation: origins of sensory nerve fibers in the nodose ganglion of the cat.
J Voice
3:
314-320,
1989.
52.
Yoshida, Y,
Tanaka Y,
Hirano M,
and
Nakashima T.
Sensory innervation of the pharynx and larynx.
Am J Med
108, Suppl4A:
51s-61s,
2000[Medline].
53.
Yoshida, Y,
Tanaka Y,
Mitsumasu T,
Hirano M,
and
Kanaseki T.
Peripheral course and intramucosal distribution of the laryngeal sensory nerve fibers of cats.
Brain Res Bull
17:
95-105,
1986[Web of Science][Medline].
54.
Yoshida, Y,
Tanaka Y,
Saito T,
Shimazaki T,
and
Hirano M.
Peripheral nervous system in the larynx.
Folia Phoniatr (Basel)
44:
194-219,
1992[Medline].
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
L. B. Thomas, J. C. Stemple, R. D. Andreatta, and F. H. Andrade Establishing a New Animal Model for the Study of Laryngeal Biology and Disease: An Anatomic Study of the Mouse Larynx J Speech Lang Hear Res, June 1, 2009; 52(3): 802 - 811. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. C. Stemple and L. B. Thomas Voicing a Vision of Translational Research Voice and Voice Disorders, November 1, 2008; 18(3): 105 - 111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. M. Henriquez, G. M. Schulz, S. Bielamowicz, and C. L. Ludlow Laryngeal reflex responses are not modulated during human voice and respiratory tasks J. Physiol., December 15, 2007; 585(3): 779 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. M. J. Loucks, C. J. Poletto, K. G. Saxon, and C. L. Ludlow Laryngeal muscle responses to mechanical displacement of the thyroid cartilage in humans J Appl Physiol, September 1, 2005; 99(3): 922 - 930. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Ambalavanar, Y. Tanaka, W. S. Selbie, and C. L. Ludlow Neuronal Activation in the Medulla Oblongata During Selective Elicitation of the Laryngeal Adductor Response J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2004; 92(5): 2920 - 2932. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |