LingYan Zheng1, LiSong Xie1, ZhiJun Wang1, Huan Shi1, NingNing Cao1, ChuangQi Yu2. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: zhenglingyan73@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy and safety of sialendoscopy and a combined transoral or transcutaneous and sialendoscopic approach in the removal of parotid gland sialoliths. METHODS: This retrospective study included 29 patients diagnosed with parotid gland sialolithiasis who required endoscopic-assisted gland preserving therapy. Ultrasonography and computed tomography were used to diagnose parotid sialolithiasis. The use of interventional sialendoscopy, sialendoscopic-transoral, or sialendoscopic-transcutaneous procedures was determined by the characteristics of the parotid gland stones. RESULTS: The stones were extracted by interventional sialendoscopy in nine patients. The transoral procedure was performed in 15 patients with large stones which were impacted in the ductal wall. The remaining five patients were managed through an external approach via a local incision under sialendoscopy. No postoperative complications occurred. The parotid glands were functioning normally after the procedures. CONCLUSION: The combined sialendoscopic-transoral and sialendoscopic-transcutaneous operation appears to be a good alternative for parotid gland sialolithiasis in the absence of lithotripsy devices. This type of therapy can, therefore, decrease the rate of parotidectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy and safety of sialendoscopy and a combined transoral or transcutaneous and sialendoscopic approach in the removal of parotid gland sialoliths. METHODS: This retrospective study included 29 patients diagnosed with parotid gland sialolithiasis who required endoscopic-assisted gland preserving therapy. Ultrasonography and computed tomography were used to diagnose parotid sialolithiasis. The use of interventional sialendoscopy, sialendoscopic-transoral, or sialendoscopic-transcutaneous procedures was determined by the characteristics of the parotid gland stones. RESULTS: The stones were extracted by interventional sialendoscopy in nine patients. The transoral procedure was performed in 15 patients with large stones which were impacted in the ductal wall. The remaining five patients were managed through an external approach via a local incision under sialendoscopy. No postoperative complications occurred. The parotid glands were functioning normally after the procedures. CONCLUSION: The combined sialendoscopic-transoral and sialendoscopic-transcutaneous operation appears to be a good alternative for parotid gland sialolithiasis in the absence of lithotripsy devices. This type of therapy can, therefore, decrease the rate of parotidectomy.