We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Endoscopic-assisted gland-preserving therapy for chronic sialadenitis: a German and US comparison.
Archives of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery 2011 September
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether unique patterns of care are evolving in the United States compared with Germany in endoscopic management of chronic sialadenitis.
DESIGN: Comparison of consecutive series of patients.
SETTING: Academic tertiary salivary referral centers in Germany and the United States.
PATIENTS: A total of 446 patients having chronic sialadenitis treated with salivary endoscopy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare practice patterns and outcomes at each location, databases tracking patients having chronic sialadenitis treated with salivary endoscopy were searched for the following variables: age, sex, involved gland, radiographic studies, endoscopic findings, endoscopic-related complications, gland preservation rate, patient symptom control, and techniques for managing salivary stones and intraductal scar tissue.
RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the US cohort had chronic sialadenitis of the parotid gland (P = .03) and multiple gland involvement (P < .001). Salivary endoscopy was regularly performed using local anesthesia in Germany and using general anesthesia in the United States (P < .001). Endoscopic-related complication rates were higher (10.9% vs 1.6%) and gland preservation rates lower (85.9% vs 98.4%) among US patients; however, patients with intact glands demonstrated similar rates of symptom control at both centers (92.7% in the United States vs 85.3% in Germany) at the last follow-up visit. The lower rate of gland preservation in the United States is largely because of lack of access to lithotripsy for larger salivary stones.
CONCLUSIONS: Different patterns of care are emerging in the endoscopic management of chronic sialadenitis in the United States compared with Germany, where these techniques were largely developed. Nevertheless, patients with chronic sialadenitis at both locations who undergo endoscopic gland-preserving therapy have high rates of gland preservation and symptom control.
DESIGN: Comparison of consecutive series of patients.
SETTING: Academic tertiary salivary referral centers in Germany and the United States.
PATIENTS: A total of 446 patients having chronic sialadenitis treated with salivary endoscopy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare practice patterns and outcomes at each location, databases tracking patients having chronic sialadenitis treated with salivary endoscopy were searched for the following variables: age, sex, involved gland, radiographic studies, endoscopic findings, endoscopic-related complications, gland preservation rate, patient symptom control, and techniques for managing salivary stones and intraductal scar tissue.
RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the US cohort had chronic sialadenitis of the parotid gland (P = .03) and multiple gland involvement (P < .001). Salivary endoscopy was regularly performed using local anesthesia in Germany and using general anesthesia in the United States (P < .001). Endoscopic-related complication rates were higher (10.9% vs 1.6%) and gland preservation rates lower (85.9% vs 98.4%) among US patients; however, patients with intact glands demonstrated similar rates of symptom control at both centers (92.7% in the United States vs 85.3% in Germany) at the last follow-up visit. The lower rate of gland preservation in the United States is largely because of lack of access to lithotripsy for larger salivary stones.
CONCLUSIONS: Different patterns of care are emerging in the endoscopic management of chronic sialadenitis in the United States compared with Germany, where these techniques were largely developed. Nevertheless, patients with chronic sialadenitis at both locations who undergo endoscopic gland-preserving therapy have high rates of gland preservation and symptom control.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app