Ya-Qiong Zhang1, Xin Ye2, Yuan Meng1, Ya-Ning Zhao1, Deng-Gao Liu3, Guang-Yan Yu4. 1. Resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, the National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, and the Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China. 2. Attending Doctor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, the National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, and the Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China. 3. Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, the National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, and the Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China. Electronic address: kqldg@bjmu.edu.cn. 4. Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, the National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, and the Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify gland function before and after endoscopy-assisted lithectomy for patients with parotid stones and to analyze correlations among different evaluation modalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study investigated 58 patients (27 men and 31 women) with a stone larger than 5 mm or multiple parotid stones who underwent successful endoscopy-assisted surgery at the authors' center from August 2007 through September 2017. Meticulous postoperative manipulations were administered routinely for 3 to 6 months to promote functional recovery of the affected gland. Gland function was evaluated preoperatively and 6 to 36 months (mean, 12 months) postoperatively by sialography, scintigraphy, and sialometry. Statistical analyses were conducted to quantify gland function recovery and to distinguish correlations among the 3 objective tests. RESULTS: Preoperative sialograms exhibited ductal ectasia at the stone site with ductal stenosis anterior to the stone (n = 53) or duct interruption at the stone site (n = 5). Postoperative sialograms of 45 patients without stones were categorized as approximately normal (type I; n = 17); showing ectasia or stenosis of the main duct without persistent contrast on the functional film (type II; n = 16); showing ectasia or stenosis of the main duct with mild contrast retention (type III; n = 6); or showing poor ductal shape with evident contrast retention (type IV; n = 6). Scintigraphy of 23 preoperative and 12 postoperative patients and sialometry of 24 preoperative and 12 postoperative patients indicated severe preoperative impairment and postoperative improvement of gland function. Postoperatively, although no relevant differences in saliva flow rate were found between the 2 sides, scintigraphy showed lower function of the affected gland compared with the control side. Statistical data showed positive correlations among the 3 methods. Sialography intuitively reflected the ductal shape, whereas sialometry and scintigraphy were more sensitive for evaluating gland function. CONCLUSION: For patients with parotid stones, minimally invasive endoscopic surgery and meticulous postoperative manipulations help preserve the glands and facilitate recovery of gland function. The 3 evaluating modalities have certain positive correlations.
PURPOSE: To quantify gland function before and after endoscopy-assisted lithectomy for patients with parotid stones and to analyze correlations among different evaluation modalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study investigated 58 patients (27 men and 31 women) with a stone larger than 5 mm or multiple parotid stones who underwent successful endoscopy-assisted surgery at the authors' center from August 2007 through September 2017. Meticulous postoperative manipulations were administered routinely for 3 to 6 months to promote functional recovery of the affected gland. Gland function was evaluated preoperatively and 6 to 36 months (mean, 12 months) postoperatively by sialography, scintigraphy, and sialometry. Statistical analyses were conducted to quantify gland function recovery and to distinguish correlations among the 3 objective tests. RESULTS: Preoperative sialograms exhibited ductal ectasia at the stone site with ductal stenosis anterior to the stone (n = 53) or duct interruption at the stone site (n = 5). Postoperative sialograms of 45 patients without stones were categorized as approximately normal (type I; n = 17); showing ectasia or stenosis of the main duct without persistent contrast on the functional film (type II; n = 16); showing ectasia or stenosis of the main duct with mild contrast retention (type III; n = 6); or showing poor ductal shape with evident contrast retention (type IV; n = 6). Scintigraphy of 23 preoperative and 12 postoperative patients and sialometry of 24 preoperative and 12 postoperative patients indicated severe preoperative impairment and postoperative improvement of gland function. Postoperatively, although no relevant differences in saliva flow rate were found between the 2 sides, scintigraphy showed lower function of the affected gland compared with the control side. Statistical data showed positive correlations among the 3 methods. Sialography intuitively reflected the ductal shape, whereas sialometry and scintigraphy were more sensitive for evaluating gland function. CONCLUSION: For patients with parotid stones, minimally invasive endoscopic surgery and meticulous postoperative manipulations help preserve the glands and facilitate recovery of gland function. The 3 evaluating modalities have certain positive correlations.