Laryngoscope. 2021 Aug 11. doi: 10.1002/lary.29815. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: For patients with submandibular sialolithiasis, there are many gland-preserving treatment options including sialendoscopy. Sialendoscopy, however, requires expensive instrumentation with limited availability, which may not be required for routine cases. The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of patients with submandibular sialolithiasis undergoing sialendoscopy versus those undergoing transoral incisional sialithotomy.
STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal, prospective study of patient undergoing gland-preserving therapy for submandibular sialolithiasis.
METHODS: The study was a prospective, nonrandomized trial of 30 patients with submandibular sialolithiasis who received gland-preserving treatment by either sialendoscopy-assisted techniques (Scope group; 14 patients) or transoral sialithotomy with or without dochoplasty (No Scope group; 16 patients). Factors analyzed between the two groups included age, race, gender, size of stone, location of stone, gland(s) involved, surgical method, and modified salivary Oral Health Impact Profile (sOHIP) scores before and after therapy.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the Scope and No Scope groups regarding age, race, or gender. There was a significant difference in stone size between the groups, with the No Scope group having larger stones on average. Both treatments led to statistically significant symptomatic improvement in sOHIP scores. There was no statistically significant difference in salivary quality of life improvement between the Scope and No Scope groups (P = .33).
CONCLUSIONS: Sialendoscopy is an important diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of salivary disorders, but is not associated with improved outcomes in gland-preserving treatments for routine submandibular sialolithiasis. Transoral stone removal alone may have equivalent symptomatic outcomes in the management of select sialoliths.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III Laryngoscope, 2021.
PMID:34378799 | DOI:10.1002/lary.29815
