Surgeon-performed ultrasound and transfacial sialoendoscopy for complete parotid duct stenosis

Ultrasound in Inflammatory and Obstructive Salivary Gland Diseases: Own Experiences and a Review of the Literature

Background: Ultrasound is established as a diagnostic tool in salivary glands for obstructive diseases such as sialolithiasis and tumors. Concerning inflammatory diseases and in non-sialolithiasis-caused obstruction, much fewer data are available. In recent years, technical development has allowed a better assessment of the gland parenchyma, and knowledge about intraductal pathologies has increased considerably, which has provided new insights and a new interpretation of ultrasound findings. Objectives: To provide a comprehensive review of the literature that includes our own experiences and to point out the state of the art in ultrasound in the diagnostics of inflammatory and obstructive salivary gland diseases, taking adequate techniques and recent technical developments into consideration. Data sources and study eligibility criteria: A systematic literature search was performed in Pubmed using various specific key words. Results: According to the literature results, including our own experiences, ultrasound is of value in up to >90% of cases presenting with inflammatory and/or obstructive diseases. Technical developments (e.g., elastography) and the application of modified ultrasound techniques (e.g., transoral ultrasound) have contributed to these results. Today, ultrasound is considered a first-line diagnostic tool in these diseases. However, in some inflammatory diseases, the final diagnosis can be made only after inclusion of the anamnesis, clinical symptoms, serologic blood tests, or histopathologic investigation. Conclusions: Ultrasound can be considered as a first-line diagnostic tool in obstructive and inflammatory salivary gland diseases. In obstructive diseases, it may be sufficient for diagnostics in >90% of cases. In inflammatory diseases, ultrasound is at least an excellent screening method and can be used to establish the diagnosis in cases of an early suspicion. In all diseases ultrasound can contribute to better management and can be used for monitoring during follow-up.

Practical Salivary Ultrasound Imaging Tips and Pearls

Ultrasound imaging is a valuable and effective clinical tool for salivary gland disorder evaluation and management. Pathologies including salivary duct stenosis, sialolithiasis, neoplasms, and autoimmune disorders have characteristic sonographic features. Maneuvers such as bimanual palpation and oral administration of sialagogues during the ultrasound examination can enhance examination findings. Ultrasound guidance is useful for targeting needle biopsies of neoplasms, ensuring appropriate intraparenchymal gland injections, and augmenting salivary duct instrumentation and intraoperative management.

Ultrasound in the Assessment of Parotid Duct Stenosis

OBJECTIVES

Parotid duct stenosis may occur with or without accompanying ductal anomalies, with associated differences in their pathogenesis and management. By identifying the characteristics of a stenosis, ultrasound (US) can assist in tailored management of parotid duct stenosis. The objective of this study was therefore to describe the US characteristics of parotid duct stenoses and to evaluate criteria for whether and in what ways these can be distinguished from each other by using US.

METHODS

A total of 108 patients who presented with parotid duct stenoses (130 parotid glands) were examined with high-resolution US between 2014 and 2017. The stenoses were assessed for duct dilatation, location, signs of ductal anomalies (circular encroachments/webs, duct bending/kinking, and presence of a megaduct) and the echogenicity of the gland parenchyma.

RESULTS

Ultrasound was able to distinguish between stenoses associated with ductal anomalies and those without anomalies. Webs (82.5% versus 7.8%; P < .001), kinking (75.0% versus 3.3%; P < .001), and a megaduct (87.50% versus 15.63%; P < .001) and a tendency toward normal echogenicity in the gland parenchyma (77.5% versus 25.6%; P < .001) were significantly associated with ductal anomalies. Stenoses associated with ductal anomalies also had significantly larger duct diameters in comparison with those without anomalies (mean ± SD, 9.19 ± 3.65 versus 3.27 ± 2.17 mm; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes US parameters that allow more detailed characterization of parotid stenoses with or without accompanying ductal anomalies. Differentiating between these at an early stage may be helpful for decision making on the further management in these patients.

Parotid ductal stenosis after facial cosmetic surgery (2 case reports)

RATIONALE

Facial cosmetic surgery sometimes causes complications involving surrounding tissues. In particular, parotid damage may cause fibrous tissue formation, ductal stenosis, and obstruct salivary flow. Affected patients usually complain of symptoms such as pain and swelling.

PATIENT CONCERNS

The authors report 2 cases of obstructive parotitis, arising as a complication of facial cosmetic surgery that were treated successfully using sialendoscopic procedures.

DIAGNOSIS

A diagnosis of parotid ductal stenosis was made based on medical history, clinical manifestations, imaging studies, and sialendoscopic findings for the 2 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

The successful sialendoscopic procedures was given to the 2 patients.

OUTCOMES

The 2 patients have shown no recurrent symptoms during follow-up.

LESSONS

Surgeons that perform facial cosmetic procedures should attain a thorough knowledge of the surgical anatomy of the parotid region and sialendoscopic procedure may be helpful for the management of obstructive parotitis due to complication of cosmetic surgery.

Salivary duct stenosis: diagnosis and treatment

The management of stenoses of the major salivary glands had undergone a significant change during the last 15-20 years. Accurate diagnosis forms the basis of adapted minimal invasive therapy. Conventional sialography and MR-sialography are useful examination tools, and ultrasound seems to be a first-line investigational tool if salivary duct stenosis is suspected as cause of gland obstruction. Sialendoscopy is the best choice to establish final diagnosis and characterise the stenosis in order to plan accurate treatment. In all major salivary glands, inflammatory stenosis can be distinguished from fibrotic stenosis. In the parotid duct system, an additional stenosis associated with various abnormalities of the duct system has been reported. Conservative therapy is not sufficient in the majority of cases. The development of a minimally invasive treatment regime, in which sialendoscopy plays a major role, has made the preservation of the gland and its function possible in over 90% of cases. Ductal incision procedures are the most important measure in submandibular duct stenoses, but sialendoscopy becomes more important in the more centrally located stenoses. Sialendoscopic controlled opening and dilation is the dominating method in parotid duct stenoses. In 10-15% of cases, success can be achieved after a combined treatment regime had been applied. This review article aims to give an overview on the epidemiology, diagnostics and current state of the art of the treatment of salivary duct stenoses.

Surgeon-Performed Ultrasound for Chronic Obstructive Sialadenitis Helps Predict Sialendoscopic Findings and Outcomes

Objective

To determine the accuracy of surgeon-performed ultrasound (SP-US) features for predicting intraoperative sialendoscopic findings and to correlate ultrasound features with short-term symptomatic outcomes following sialendoscopy-assisted salivary duct surgery (SASDS).

Study Design

Case series with chart review.

Setting

The practices of 2 academic sialendoscopy surgeons.

Subjects and Methods

Between February 2014 and September 2015, 82 patients with 105 symptomatic glands underwent SASDS, of whom 56 patients (75 glands) met inclusion criteria. SP-US and sialendoscopic findings were reviewed for patients with chronic obstructive sialadenitis who underwent SASDS and who had been prospectively evaluated with the University of California–San Francisco Chronic Obstructive Sialadenitis Symptoms (COSS) questionnaire (scored 0-100) administered preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively.

Results

The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of SP-US for identifying sialoliths intraoperatively were 94% (33/35) and 91% (39/43), respectively. Of glands with sialoliths on SP-US, 97% (34/35) had complete symptom resolution (COSS ≤10) after SASDS. The PPV and NPV of salivary duct dilation on SP-US for finding a corresponding stenosis on sialendoscopy were 93% (14/15) and 50% (14/28), respectively. Nonsialolith SP-US features with the highest PPV for complete or partial symptom resolution (COSS ≤25) following SASDS included distal duct dilation of all glands (86%; 6/7) and dilation of both distal and proximal parotid ducts (75%; 6/8).

Conclusion

SP-US has high accuracy for ruling in and ruling out sialoliths, as well as for ruling in but not for necessarily ruling out stenosis presence and location. Ultrasound is helpful in estimating degree of short-term symptom response following SASDS.