Outcomes of drainless outpatient parotidectomy

Outpatient parotidectomy: Outcomes, safety and satisfaction

PURPOSE

Parotidectomies are rarely performed on an outpatient basis. The specific perioperative outcomes and their management remains insufficiently described to change daily practice. The objectives were to study the outcomes, the complications and the patient satisfaction rate in parotidectomy performed on an outpatient basis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective monocentric database study on 85 patients who underwent parotidectomy as a first and sole procedure from 2015 to 2020. We analyzed perioperative outcomes between outpatients and inpatients.

RESULTS

Among 28 outpatients and 57 inpatients, no significant differences in total perioperative complications (p = .66; OR = 1.25; 95 % confidence interval (CI) [0.47; 3.36]), reoperations (p = .55), readmissions (p = 1), or unplanned visits (p = .52) were shown in multivariate analysis. The conversion rate for surgical reasons was 8.6 %, and the satisfaction rate was high.

CONCLUSION

Although outpatient parotidectomies should be as safe as for inpatients, the high rate of minor complications requires specific perioperative management, such as a systematic early postoperative visit and optimized preoperative information in order to be carried out with minimal issues.

The timing of drain removal in parotidectomies: outcomes of removal at 4 h post-operatively and a Canadian survey of practice patterns

BACKGROUND

The post-operative management of parotidectomies is highly provider dependent. No guidelines are currently available for timing of parotid drain removal. This study aimed to assess: (1) outcomes and complications after early drain removal (< 4 h, post-operative day [POD] 0) versus late drain removal (POD ≥ 1); (2) current Canadian provider practices.

METHODS

A single surgeons ten-year parotidectomy practice was reviewed, spanning his practice change from routine POD ≥ 1 drain removal to POD 0 removal, with extraction of patient demographic, disease, and complication variables. An anonymous, cross-sectional survey on parotid drain practices was distributed to Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery members. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon Rank Sum, and unpaired student's t-tests were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 526 patients were included and 44.7% (235/526) had drains removed POD 0. There was no significant difference in hematoma or seroma rates between the POD 0 and POD ≥ 1 drain removal cohorts. The national survey on parotid drain management had 176 responses. The majority (67.9%) reported routinely using drains after parotidectomy and 62.8% reported using a drain output based criteria for removal. The most common cut-off output was 30 ml in 24 h (range 5-70 ml).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in hematoma or seroma rates for patients with parotid drains removed on POD 0 versus POD ≥ 1. Our national survey found significant variation in Canadian parotidectomy drain removal practices, which may be an area that can be further assessed to minimize hospital resources and improve patient care.

Safety outcomes and patient convenience in outpatient parotidectomy

BACKGROUND

Parotidectomies have historically been performed on an inpatient basis despite being well-tolerated surgeries with minimal postoperative wound care and low rates of complications at high-volume institutions. Past studies have supported the safety of outpatient surgery for parotidectomy but have been limited to superficial parotidectomy and have not addressed the patient experience surrounding the surgical intervention such as pre-operative and post-operative care and communication.

PURPOSE

This study assesses the impact of outpatient superficial, deep, and partial parotid surgery on various parameters including surgical safety, distance traveled for care, utilization of telehealth, and patient-initiated communication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study from January 2020 to October 2021. Patients undergoing superficial lobe, deep lobe, and partial parotidectomies for benign and malignant pathologies were divided into inpatient and outpatient cohorts. A multivariable model examined the relationship between admission status and surgical complications, adjusted for age, sex, and tumor size.

RESULTS

159 patients total, 94 outpatient and 65 inpatients. No statistical difference in rates of surgical complications with the exception of salivary leak. There was an increased rate of salivary leak reported in the inpatient group (OR 5.4, 95 % CI 1.6 to 18.0, p = 0.01). Mean patient travel distance of 354 miles one-way. Post-operatively, 76 % were evaluated via video visit. Following discharge, >55 % of patients initiated communication with the surgical team, which was not statistically different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient parotidectomy is safe and can be more convenient, but telehealth communication must be balanced with rigorous attention to patient education.

Outpatient parotidectomy with or without the use of a post-operative drain: A retrospective bi-institutional study

OBJECTIVE

Parotid surgery is historically performed as an inpatient procedure and suctions drains are predominantly used during surgery. Recent literature provides evidence that outpatient parotid surgery is safe and effective. Our study aims to describe the results of drainless outpatient parotidectomy and outpatient parotidectomy with drain placement and compare their outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Bi-institutional retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients that underwent outpatient drain-less parotidectomy and patients that underwent outpatient parotidectomy with post-operative drain placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Complication rates, unplanned post-operative visits, unplanned prolonged stay.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty patients underwent outpatient parotidectomy with drain placement and 31 patients underwent outpatient drainless parotidectomy in two different hospitals. The incidence of haematoma (drain: 3.1% vs. drainless: 0%, p = 1), infection (drain: 14.3% vs. drainless: 13.8%, p = 1) and salivary fistula (drain: 5.6% vs. drainless: 3.4, p = 1) were comparable between both groups. Seroma or sialocele was more frequently seen in the drain-less group (27.6% vs. 6.2%, p < .001), but were all managed conservatively. Within 10 days after surgery, unplanned visits seemed more frequent in the drain group, although the difference was not statistically significant (14.9% vs. 3.4%, p = .16).

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient parotid surgery with or without the use of a post-operative drain is safe, practical and feasible. Same-day discharge with and without drain placement yield comparable outcomes. However, the results need to be interpreted cautiously as this study was limited by a small cohort of parotidectomies without drain placement. Future studies should further compare both approaches.

Drainless parotidectomy using tissue fibrin sealant - A retrospective case-control study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of drainless parotidectomy using fibrin sealant on length of stay, post-operative seroma and related complications. For this purpose, a retrospective matched case-control series was held in a single academic center. All patients who underwent drainless parotidectomies, including deep lobe tumors and revision surgeries, were compared to matched controls in which a suction drain was inserted. Main outcomes were length of hospital stay and post-operative seroma. A total of 123 patients (41 cases and 82 controls) were included in the study. Fibrin sealant group had higher rates of total parotidectomy compared with the control group (25.0% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.054). Length of stay was significantly shorter in the fibrin sealant group (1.0 ± 0.3 days vs. 1.5 ± 0.6 days, p < 0.001, respectively). No statistically significant difference was found between the fibrin sealant group and the control regarding post-operative seromas (9.8% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.574, respectively), aspirations rate (7.3% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.381), and infection rates (0% vs.3.7%, p = 0.550). In conclusion, drainless parotidectomy does not increase post operative seroma rates and related complications, and can also be implemented for revision surgery.

Patient safety and quality improvements in parotid surgery

Parotidectomy is the mainstay treatment for tumors of the parotid gland. In an effort to improve clinical outcomes, several modern surgical techniques and perioperative interventions have been evaluated and refined. This review discusses current and actively debated perioperative interventions aimed at improving patient safety and the quality of parotidectomy. Relevant high‐impact literature pertaining to preoperative diagnostic modalities, intraoperative surgical techniques, and postoperative care will be described.

Fine needle aspiration is a suitable diagnostic modality for parotid tumors but has important limitations.

Extracapsular dissection is safe and effective for small superficial tumors away from the facial nerve.

Nerve monitoring may reduce temporary facial weakness but does not replace robust surgical technique.

Outpatient parotidectomy is safe and feasible for appropriately selected patients.

Postparotidectomy sialocele: A 6-year review of underlying factors

BACKGROUND

Postparotidectomy sialocele is a frustrating challenge. Published rates of postparotidectomy fluid collections range from 6% to 39%. We report our experience of 398 parotidectomies performed over a 6-year period.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of parotidectomies performed over a 6-year period was completed. Drain placement, smoking status, tumor size, and postoperative utilization of scopolamine were analyzed. Binary logistical regression and odds ratio calculations were performed.

RESULTS

Postparotidectomy sialocele occurred in 25% of patients. Neither suction drain placement nor usage of immediate postoperative scopolamine (in a 22-patient subset) prevented sialocele formation. Smoking status also did not correlate. Increasing resection size was linearly correlated with the risk of sialocele.

CONCLUSION

Drain placement and smoking status do not correlate with sialocele prevention after parotidectomy. Sialocele formation directly correlates with the resection size. These data may guide preoperative counseling; however, additional work is necessary to identify effective prevention mechanisms for postparotidectomy sialocele.

Outpatient Parotidectomy, a Safety and Financial Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to investigate the safety, efficacy, and potential cost-savings of the outpatient parotidectomy procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent a parotidectomy at a large academic center from 2015 through 2019 including demographic data, postoperative complications, drain placement, readmission, and financial cost. A comparison was performed between patients who underwent an outpatient vs inpatient parotidectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 335 patients underwent parotidectomy (136 outpatient; 199 inpatient). Comparison of patient demographics, common comorbidities, tumor size, tumor type, postoperative complications, and readmission rate was similar between the inpatient and outpatient cohorts. The overall mean cost difference between inpatient parotidectomy and outpatient parotidectomy for all years was $1528.58 (95%CI: $1139-$1916).

CONCLUSION

The outpatient parotidectomy procedure has a comparable safety profile to the inpatient procedure while providing a significant cost-savings benefit.

Intraoperative botulinum toxin injection for superficial partial parotidectomy: A prospective pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Sialocele and salivary fistula are not serious but troublesome complications after parotidectomy. Various modalities have been introduced to prevent postoperative saliva-related complications. However, clinical trials assessing the prophylactic use of botulinum toxin (BTX) for parotidectomy have not been conducted yet. Herein, we report a pilot study investigating the safety and efficacy of intraoperative BTX (iBTX) injection in partial superficial parotidectomy (PSP).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with benign parotid tumour were prospectively recruited for this clinical trial from 2017 to 2019. The study participants underwent PSP with iBTX injection. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical information of all the consecutive patients who underwent PSP without iBTX from 2013 to 2019. These patients were divided into two groups: the iBTX group (n = 36) and the control group (n = 54).

RESULTS

Permanent facial palsy was not observed in either group. Two patients (3.7%) had transient marginal palsy in the control group but none had it in the iBTX group. The incidence of sialocele was significantly lower in the iBTX group than in the control group (2.8% vs. 20.4%, P < .05). Although the incidence of salivary fistula was lower in the iBTX group than in the control group (0% vs. 7.4%), no significant difference was determined between the two groups (P = .147). Total drainage volume was significantly lower in the iBTX group than in the control group (55.0 mL vs. 116.6 mL, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

iBTX injection may be safe and effective in reducing sialocele and postoperative drainage in PSP. It might be a useful option to prevent saliva-related complications after PSP.

Day case superficial parotidectomy-does it work?

PURPOSE

To establish if day case superficial parotidectomy is feasible, safe and does not result in excess readmissions.

METHOD

A retrospective review was carried out of all patients listed for superficial parotidectomy with day case intent by a single surgeon between January 2016 and December 2019 inclusively. The reasons for failure of same day discharge were established. Postoperative complications and readmissions were recorded. Our approach for a superficial parotidectomy typically includes the use of a 10Fr suction drain which is removed at 4 h postoperatively if the output is less than 30 ml.

RESULTS

Ninety-one consecutive superficial parotidectomies listed for day case surgery were eligible for inclusion. Seventeen patients failed to be discharged on the same day and were admitted giving a day case success rate of 81%. Most of these (n = 9) occurred in the first year of adopting day case surgery. The most common reason to admit patients was a late finish (n = 8, 47%). Six patients (25%) were admitted due to anaesthetic complications. One patient had a surgical complication requiring admission.

CONCLUSION

Our series demonstrates that day case superficial parotidectomy using a surgical drain is feasible, safe and does not result in an unacceptable readmission rate. In our experience, surgical complications are an uncommon cause for day case failure. The most common cause for day case failure was a late finish. Postoperative complications including bleeding, seroma/salivary collection and facial nerve palsy were in keeping with or better than those quoted in the literature.

Perioperative Complications after Parotidectomy Using a Standardized Grading Scale Classification System

Perioperative complications after parotidectomy are poorly studied and have a potential impact on hospitalization stay. The Clavien–Dindo classification of postoperative complications used in visceral surgery allows a recording of all complications, including a grading scale related to the severity of complication. The cohort analyzed for perioperative complications is composed of 436 parotidectomies classified into three types, four groups, and three classes, depending on extent of parotid resection, inclusion of additional procedures, and pathology, respectively. Using the Clavien–Dindo classification, complications were reported in 77% of the interventions. In 438 complications, 430 (98.2%) were classified as minor (332 grade I and 98 grade II), and 8 (1.8%) were classified as major (grade III). Independent variables affecting the risk of perioperative complications were duration of surgery (odds ratio = 1.007, p-value = 0.029) and extent of parotidectomy (odds ratio = 4.043, p-value = 0.007). Total/subtotal parotidectomy was associated with an increased risk of grade II-III complications (odds ratio = 2.866 (95% CI: 1.307–6.283), p-value = 0.009). Median hospital stay increased moderately in patients with complications. Use of Clavien–Dindo classification shows that parotidectomy is followed by a higher rate of perioperative complications than usually reported. Almost all complications are minor and have limited consequence on hospital stay.

Superficial Parotidectomy: Impact of Postoperative Drainage

BACKGROUND

Use of suction drain after superficial parotidectomy (SP) is based on national consensus considered best practice, but there is no evidence on the effect of the treatment. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of drainage after SP by evaluating the rate of complications after SP in relation to the (ie, duration) of drainage and tumor size.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed involving data from all consecutive patients undergoing SP at the Ear, Nose, and Throat department, Regional Hospital West Jutland, Denmark, between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. Demographics including comorbidity, medication, tumor size, postoperative secretion through the drainage, as well as complications (hematoma, seroma, infection, fistulas, Frey syndrome, facial nerve palsy) were registered. Patients with secretion below 25 mL were compared to patients with secretion above 25 mL, that is, drainage less than 24 hours versus longer than 24 hours. Results: Two hundred five consecutive patients undergoing SP were enrolled. The overall risk of postoperative infection was 16.2%. Ten of 33 patients with infection were also diagnosed with an hematoma or seroma. The risk of infection increased with secretion above 25 mL (27.2%) compared to patients with less than 25 mL (13.1%; P = .0318). The same accounts for the risk of seromas/hematomas (P = .0055). We found no evidence that demographics or comorbidity correlated to the secretion in the drainage, but there is a tendency toward male gender having a higher risk off secretion above 25 mL (odds ratio 1.39).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the risk of complications after SP increased with secretion beyond 25 mL (ie, drainage for more than 24 hours). This applied in particular to infections and seromas/hematomas demanding treatment. The use of routine drainage after SP is questionable, and a randomized trial is warranted to unravel the necessity of postoperative drainage.

Outpatient Parotidectomy: A Retrospective Series

OBJECTIVES

Recent literature suggests that outpatient head and neck surgery is safe and may decrease costs. This study assesses whether outpatient parotidectomy differs in complication type and rate from inpatient surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent parotidectomy at our institution from 2011 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and divided by inpatient or outpatient status. Complications including infection, seroma, salivary fistula, hematoma, and flap necrosis, as well as readmission rates were tabulated. Drain placement, related to tumor size, was also analyzed using a receiver operating curve.

RESULTS

144 patients had available data for analysis. Nine of the 144 patients had complications. Seven of 98 outpatients and two of 46 inpatients had complications. There was no statistically significant difference in complication rate between the two groups (P = .518). Tumor size ≥4.62 cm³ was associated with drain placement (P = .044).

CONCLUSION

Outpatient parotidectomy is a safe and viable alternative for carefully selected patients.

[Planning and design of European prospective randomized trial on the value of drain in parotidectomy]

INTRODUCTION

There are no valid clinical studies on the value of wound drains in parotid surgery. The aim of the current trial is to analyze the influence of the closed wound drain (redon) on the incidence of postoperative complications such as bleeding, wound healing problems, infection, as well as salivary cyst and fistula after superficial or partial parotidectomy.

METHODS

A European-wide multicenter prospective randomized study was planned. The study protocol was prepared by the leading study center (ENT University Hospital Cologne) in cooperation with the ENT University Hospitals Jena and Göttingen. The calculation of the number of cases was carried out with G*Power. The study includes test persons with an indication for parotidectomy for a benign tumor without known coagulation disorder or ongoing anticoagulation. Preoperative randomization and data management is software-supported (REDCap 9.1.24, Vanderbilt University).

RESULTS

The study has been approved by the leading ethics committee in 10/2019 and is open since 04/2019. Currently, nine (9) ENT hospitals are participating in the study, 6 of them in Germany and 3 in Austria. Enrollment of patients is ongoing in 7 centers. With a calculated follow-up-to-treat population of 800 test persons, the planned duration of the study is 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The Redon-study is the first prospective randomized study worldwide to investigate the effect of a drain in parotidectomy. In order to achieve the recruitment goal within the planned time frame, the participation of further specialized study centers is needed. We also encourage all ENT physicians to make their patients aware of the Redon study, inform them about the possibility of participating in the study and refer them to one of the participating centers.

Outpatient versus Inpatient Parotidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Parotidectomies are commonly performed procedures by head and neck surgeons. Although parotidectomies are historically inpatient procedures, recent observational evidence has highlighted the potential for parotidectomies to be performed on an outpatient basis. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to compare complications and unplanned health care utilization between patients undergoing outpatient versus inpatient parotidectomy.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHODS

Studies comparing the outcomes of outpatient parotidectomy with those of inpatient parotidectomy were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Postoperative complications (hematoma, facial nerve dysfunction, seroma, fistulisation, Frey syndrome, and wound infection) and rates of 30-day readmission, reintervention, and emergency department presentation were compared.

RESULTS

We screened 1018 nonduplicate articles to include 5 studies, all of which were retrospective cohort studies. There were fewer complications found in the outpatient group (relative risk = 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.40-0.93). Outpatient procedures were more commonly performed on patients who lived close to the hospital, had fewer comorbidities, and had less extensive planned surgery.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient parotidectomy appears safe in select patients with outcomes comparable with inpatient surgery. However, evidence overall is of low quality, and further work is needed to delineate a satisfactory set of criteria for appropriate patient identification.