PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical value of suction drainage to prevent fistula after parotidectomy, and seek the best opportunity to remove the drainage according to the draining output and duration. METHODS: One hundred and ninety-four patients with parotid diseases after superficial parotidectomy were assigned into pressure dressing group and suction drainage group. Pressure dressing was used after suction drainage tube was removed in the pressure group, while suction drainage tube was fixed through the process in the suction group. Postoperative salivary fistula occurrence between the 2 groups was analyzed with Pearson chi-square test, and the contribution of the output and duration resulting in salivary fistula was analyzed by Fisher's exact test with SPSS 19.0 software package. RESULTS: The occurrence of salivary fistula in the pressure dressing group and suction group was 11.6% and 15.5%, respectively in the suction group. No significance difference was found between the 2 groups (P>0.05). In the suction drainage group, significant correlation of the draining duration and salivary fistula was not found (P>0.05). However, the draining output less than 20 mL resulted in lower salivary fistula rate compared with the draining output of 20-30 mL. CONCLUSIONS: According to our findings, suction drainage can be used as a substitute for pressure dressing after parotidectomy in preventing salivary fistula, and the best timing of drainage extubation is when the draining output is less than 20 mL within 24 hours.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical value of suction drainage to prevent fistula after parotidectomy, and seek the best opportunity to remove the drainage according to the draining output and duration. METHODS: One hundred and ninety-four patients with parotid diseases after superficial parotidectomy were assigned into pressure dressing group and suction drainage group. Pressure dressing was used after suction drainage tube was removed in the pressure group, while suction drainage tube was fixed through the process in the suction group. Postoperative salivary fistula occurrence between the 2 groups was analyzed with Pearson chi-square test, and the contribution of the output and duration resulting in salivary fistula was analyzed by Fisher's exact test with SPSS 19.0 software package. RESULTS: The occurrence of salivary fistula in the pressure dressing group and suction group was 11.6% and 15.5%, respectively in the suction group. No significance difference was found between the 2 groups (P>0.05). In the suction drainage group, significant correlation of the draining duration and salivary fistula was not found (P>0.05). However, the draining output less than 20 mL resulted in lower salivary fistula rate compared with the draining output of 20-30 mL. CONCLUSIONS: According to our findings, suction drainage can be used as a substitute for pressure dressing after parotidectomy in preventing salivary fistula, and the best timing of drainage extubation is when the draining output is less than 20 mL within 24 hours.