Objective: Examine outcomes of transfacial gland-preserving removal of difficult parotid stones and compare the cost and operative time to traditional parotidectomy. Study Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis and retrospective chart review. Methods: Patients who underwent transfacial removal of symptomatic parotid sialoliths at a tertiary medical center from June 2010 to July 2015 were evaluated. Outcomes included operative technique, stone size, stone location, complications, and symptom relief. In addition, patients who underwent traditional parotidectomy for chronic sialadenitis were identified. The charges and times for both procedures were reviewed and compared. Results: Forty-four patients underwent transfacial resection for symptomatic parotid sialolithiasis. Stones were most often located in the main duct and hilum (53.3%), with fewer intraglandular stones (46.7%). No facial nerve weakness was observed. Of those with follow-up, 33 (87%) patients reported at least partial resolution of symptoms. Overall transfacial technique charges were significantly less expensive (U.S.$) than parotidectomy (mean difference −8,064.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] −13,472.78 to −2,655.40; P = 0.033). Anesthesia charges (mean difference −2,997.85; 95% CI, −5,748.81 to −246.89; P = 0.035) and operating room charges (mean difference −4,793.91; 95% CI, −8,958.09 to −629.72; P = 0.028) were also less expensive for the transfacial technique. Finally, mean procedure time for transfacial removal of parotid stones was shorter than for parotidectomy (120.2 ± 49.9 vs. 178.4 ± 41.3 minutes, respectively; P = 0.002). Conclusion: Transfacial gland-preserving removal of difficult parotid stones is a well tolerated and effective alternative to parotidectomy. Moreover, it is faster and less expensive than parotidectomy, maximizing both surgeon time and hospital resources. Level of Evidence: 4. Laryngoscope, 127:1080–1086, 2017.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
We acknowledge Jean B. Craig, PhD, MS, BS (Biomedical Informatics Center, MUSC) for her role at the South Carolina Clinical and Translational Research Institute (MUSC, Charleston, South Carolina) and her help in accessing and providing the charge data for this project.
- cost-effectiveness analysis
- economic evaluation
- salivary endoscopy
- salivary stones