Alexandra E Kejner1, Eben L Rosenthal. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0012, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel method for the removal of the salivary bypass tube (SBT) that precludes the need for extraction under general anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS/TECHNIQUE: Patients who had undergone laryngectomy/laryngopharyngectomy with subsequent development of pharyngocutaneous fistula and intraoperative placement of a salivary bypass tube were included in this series. The tubes were removed at the bedside or in clinic utilizing a Fogarty-type method over a Foley catheter. RESULTS: Three patients underwent removal of hypopharyngeal salivary bypass tubes 1 to 2 weeks after placement. Inflation of the Foley catheter within the lumen of the salivary bypass tube facilitated successful removal without the need for additional procedures. All three patients required only topical anesthetic and tolerated the procedure with minimal discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to current methods, this technique is cost-effective and time-efficient while not compromising patient safety or comfort.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel method for the removal of the salivary bypass tube (SBT) that precludes the need for extraction under general anesthesia. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS/TECHNIQUE: Patients who had undergone laryngectomy/laryngopharyngectomy with subsequent development of pharyngocutaneous fistula and intraoperative placement of a salivary bypass tube were included in this series. The tubes were removed at the bedside or in clinic utilizing a Fogarty-type method over a Foley catheter. RESULTS: Three patients underwent removal of hypopharyngeal salivary bypass tubes 1 to 2 weeks after placement. Inflation of the Foley catheter within the lumen of the salivary bypass tube facilitated successful removal without the need for additional procedures. All three patients required only topical anesthetic and tolerated the procedure with minimal discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to current methods, this technique is cost-effective and time-efficient while not compromising patient safety or comfort.