Parotid gland sialolithiasis: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis : Title page.

IF 2.2
Giovanni Salzano, Veronica Scocca, Umberto Committeri, Stefania Troise, Luigi Angelo Vaira, Jerome R Lechien, Vincenzo Abbate, Giovanni Dell'Aversana Orabona
{"title":"Parotid gland sialolithiasis: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis : Title page.","authors":"Giovanni Salzano, Veronica Scocca, Umberto Committeri, Stefania Troise, Luigi Angelo Vaira, Jerome R Lechien, Vincenzo Abbate, Giovanni Dell'Aversana Orabona","doi":"10.1007/s00405-025-09697-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Parotid sialolithiasis represents unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to the anatomy of the gland and the proximity of the facial nerve. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various treatment modalities for parotid gland stones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Scopus and Google Scholar. Eligible observational studies and clinical trials reporting on patients with parotid stones were included. The outcomes assessed included stone-free rate, symptom improvement and the presence of any complications. A single-arm random-effects meta-analysis was performed, focusing on endoscopy-only, endoscopy-assisted and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Bias risk was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 42 studies involving 1,559 patients were analyzed. Endoscopy-assisted removal showed the highest stone-free rate (93%, 95%CI: 90-96) and symptom improvement (91%, 95%CI: 92-99) (p < 0.05). Combined endoscopic-external approaches were effective for complex stones but had higher complication rates (24%, 95% CI: 14-37). ESWL had a lower stone-free rate (58%) but aided long-term symptom control (p < 0.05). CT-navigation did not significantly enhance clearance (80%). Most complications were minor; no permanent facial nerve injuries were reported. The quality of the evidence was limited by heterogeneity and the lack of any randomized trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Endoscopy-assisted and combined approaches offer effective, gland-preserving options for parotid sialolithiasis. ESWL and laser techniques remain adjunctive but warrant further research. Prospective, standardized trials are needed to define any optimal management strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":520614,"journal":{"name":"European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-025-09697-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Parotid sialolithiasis represents unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to the anatomy of the gland and the proximity of the facial nerve. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various treatment modalities for parotid gland stones.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Scopus and Google Scholar. Eligible observational studies and clinical trials reporting on patients with parotid stones were included. The outcomes assessed included stone-free rate, symptom improvement and the presence of any complications. A single-arm random-effects meta-analysis was performed, focusing on endoscopy-only, endoscopy-assisted and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Bias risk was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results: A total of 42 studies involving 1,559 patients were analyzed. Endoscopy-assisted removal showed the highest stone-free rate (93%, 95%CI: 90-96) and symptom improvement (91%, 95%CI: 92-99) (p < 0.05). Combined endoscopic-external approaches were effective for complex stones but had higher complication rates (24%, 95% CI: 14-37). ESWL had a lower stone-free rate (58%) but aided long-term symptom control (p < 0.05). CT-navigation did not significantly enhance clearance (80%). Most complications were minor; no permanent facial nerve injuries were reported. The quality of the evidence was limited by heterogeneity and the lack of any randomized trials.

Conclusions: Endoscopy-assisted and combined approaches offer effective, gland-preserving options for parotid sialolithiasis. ESWL and laser techniques remain adjunctive but warrant further research. Prospective, standardized trials are needed to define any optimal management strategies.

腮腺涎石症:一项全面的系统综述和荟萃分析:标题页。
目的:腮腺涎石症代表独特的诊断和治疗挑战,由于腺的解剖结构和接近面神经。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估腮腺结石的各种治疗方式的有效性和安全性。方法:按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。通过检索PubMed/MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆、Scopus和谷歌Scholar来确定符合条件的研究。纳入了腮腺结石患者的观察性研究和临床试验报告。评估的结果包括结石无结石率、症状改善和任何并发症的存在。进行了单臂随机效应荟萃分析,重点是内窥镜,内窥镜辅助和体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)。偏倚风险采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估。结果:共分析了42项研究,涉及1559例患者。内镜辅助切除显示最高的结石清除率(93%,95%CI: 90-96)和症状改善(91%,95%CI: 92-99)。(p)结论:内镜辅助和联合入路为腮腺涎石症提供了有效的腺体保留选择。ESWL和激光技术仍然是辅助的,但需要进一步的研究。需要前瞻性的、标准化的试验来确定最佳的管理策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信