| Literature DB >> 28516972 |
F Carta1, P Farneti2, S Cantore2, G Macrì2, N Chuchueva1,3, L Cuffaro1, E Pasquini4, R Puxeddu1.
Abstract
Obstructive sialadenitis is the most common non-neoplastic disease of the salivary glands, and sialendoscopy is increasingly used in both diagnosis and treatment, associated in selected cases with endoscopic laser lithotripsy. Sialendoscopy is also used for combined minimally invasive external and endoscopic approaches in patients with larger and proximal stones that would require excessively long laser procedures. The present paper reports on the technical experience from the Ear, Nose and Throat Unit of the Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital of Bologna, and from the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of the University Hospital of Cagliari, Italy, including the retrospective analysis of the endoscopic and endoscopic assisted procedures performed on 48 patients (26 females and 22 males; median age 45.3; range 8-83 years) treated for chronic obstructive sialadenitis at the University Hospital of Cagliari from November 2010 to April 2016. The results from the Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital of Bologna have been previously published. The technical aspects of sialendoscopy are carefully described. The retrospective analysis of the University Hospital of Cagliari shows that the disease was unilateral in 40 patients and bilateral in 8; a total of 56 major salivary glands were treated (22 submandibular glands and 34 parotids). Five patients underwent bilateral sialendoscopy for juvenile recurrent parotitis. 10 patients were treated for non-lithiasic obstructive disease. In 33 patients (68.75%) the obstruction was caused by salivary stones (bilateral parotid lithiasis in 1 case). Only 8 patients needed a sialectomy (5 submandibular glands and 3 parotids). The conservative approach to obstructive sialadenitis is feasible and can be performed either purely endoscopically or in a combined modality, with a high percentage of success. The procedure must be performed with dedicated instrumentation by a skilled surgeon after proper training since minor to major complications can be encountered. Sialectomy should be the "extrema ratio" after failure of a conservative approach. © Copyright by Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy.Entities:
Keywords: Lithiasis; Obstructive sialadenitis; Salivary glands; Sialendoscopy
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28516972 PMCID: PMC5463517 DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1599
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital ISSN: 0392-100X Impact factor: 2.124
Fig. 1.Sialendoscopic instruments. a: Compact semi-rigid endoscope with 0.4 mm working channel. b: Four wire basket. c: Forceps. d: Progressive salivary probe and conic dilatator.
Fig. 2.Balloon dilatation of Wharton's duct.
Cohort of patients treated at the University Hospital of Cagliari.
| Case | Sex | Age | Gland | No. | Size | Laser | Stent | Resolution | Baloon | Recurrence | Further treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M | 58 | SM | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 2 | M | 53 | SM | 1 | 10 | - | - | N | - | - | Delayed sialectomy |
| 3 | M | 40 | P | 1 | 10 | - | - | N | - | - | Delayed sialectomy |
| 4 | F | 8 | P | / | / | - | - | Y | - | Y | Washing + dilatation |
| 5 | F | 83 | SM | 1 | 4 | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 6 | F | 26 | SM | 1 | 4 | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 7 | M | 44 | SM | 1 | 7 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 8 | F | 34 | SM | 1 | 8 | Y | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 9 | F | 40 | SM | 1 | 6 | Y | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 10 | F | 38 | SM | 1 | 10 | Y | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 11 | F | 67 | P | 1 | 11 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 12 | F | 58 | P | 3 | 4-5-7 | Y | Y | Y | - | Y | Washing |
| 13 | F | 30 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 14 | M | 51 | P | 1 | 7 | Y | - | Y | Y | Y | Delayed sialectomy for |
| 15 | M | 78 | P Bil. | 1+1 | 4-8.5 | Y | Y | Y | - | Y | Yag:Holmium + dilatation |
| 16 | M | 12 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 17 | M | 62 | SM | 1 | 3.5 | - | Y | Y | Y | N | - |
| 18 | M | 69 | SM | 1 | 15 | Y | - | - | - | - | Sialectomy |
| 19 | F | 19 | P | 1 | 4 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 20 | M | 40 | SM | 1 | 14 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | - |
| 21 | F | 65 | P | 2 | 1-4 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | - |
| 22 | M | 45 | SM | / | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Sialectomy |
| 23 | M | 52 | P | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 24 | F | 58 | P | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | Y | Washing + dilatation |
| 25 | M | 26 | SM | 1 | > 10 | - | - | - | - | - | Sialectomy |
| 26 | M | 37 | P | 1 | 1 | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 27 | M | 38 | SM | 2 | 8-6 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 28 | M | 37 | P | 1 | 6 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 29 | F | 27 | P | 2 | 3-5 | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 30 | F | 19 | SM | 2 | 1-4.5 | - | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 31 | F | 9 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 32 | M | 39 | SM | 1 | 8 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 33 | F | 53 | SM | 1 | 15 | Y | - | - | - | - | Sialectomy after ductal |
| 34 | F | 42 | P | 1 | 10 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 35 | F | 63 | SM | 1 | 9 | - | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 36 | F | 63 | P + SM | / | / | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 37 | F | 9 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 38 | M | 10 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 39 | M | 9 | P Bil. | / | / | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 40 | F | 56 | P | / | / | - | - | Y | Y | N | - |
| 41 | F | 38 | P | 3 | 2-4-4 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 42 | M | 42 | SM | 1 | 8 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 43 | M | 59 | P | 1 | 11 | - | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 44 | F | 30 | SM | 1 | 4 | Y | Y | Y | - | N | - |
| 45 | F | 76 | P | / | / | - | Y | Y | Y | N | - |
| 46 | M | 40 | P | 1 | 8 | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 47 | F | 46 | SM | 3 | 1.8-1.8-1.8 | - | - | Y | - | N | - |
| 48 | F | 48 | P | / | / | - | - | N | - | - | Delayed sialectomy |
Case n. 12 had 3 stones but only the stone of 7 mm was removed after fragmentation.
The sialectomy was performed after the endoscopic procedure during the same anaesthesia.
Patients treated through a combined approach.
Stone dimensions.
| Groups | No. of stones | Mean | Range |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stones removed trough submandibular endoscopic surgery without laser | 9 | 3.5 mm | 1-9 mm |
| Stones removed through submandibular holmium:YAG laser sialendoscopy | 10 | 7.9 mm | 4-14 mm |
| Stones definitively removed through submandibular sialectomy | 4 | 2.5 mm | 10-15 mm |
| Stones removed trough parotid endoscopic surgery without laser | 5 | 3.6 mm | 1-5 mm |
| Stones removed through parotid holmium:YAG laser sialendoscopy | 13 | 5.6 mm | 1-11 mm |
| Stones removed through combined approach to the parotid gland | 2 | 9.5 mm | 8-11 mm |
| Stones definitively removed through total parotidectomy | 1 | 10 mm | 10 mm |
Results of procedures done from January 2009 and December 2013 at the Ear, Nose and Throat Unit of Sant'Orsola Hospital of Bologna. SM = submandibular; GA = general anesthesia; LA = local anaesthesia; CN = cranial nerve; RJP=recurrent juvenile parotitis; N/A = data not available.
| Procedures | Patients | Parotid/ | Complications | SM | GA/LA | Pathologies | Stone | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 141 | 118 | 74/67 | 3 infections | 3 | 40/101 | 62 Lithiasis | 26 Basket | 102 Asymptomatic |
Fig. 3.Stone removal with basket. a: Stone in the salivary duct. b: Positioning of the basket behind stone. c: Opening of the basket. d: Entrapment of the stone.
Fig. 4.Endoscopic view of a parotid stone before (a) and after (b) holmium:YAG laser fragmentation.
Fig. 5.Endoscopic view of a ductal stones with the following different modalities of amplifications of the Image1 S System™ images: White Light (a), Spectra A (b), Spectra B (c).
Fig. 6.Minimal facial-lift skin incision for a right parotid stone.
Fig. 7.Parotid stone (arrow) extraction (a) and Stensen's duct suture (b).