Loading…
Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones
Objectives/Hypothesis: To compare surgical outcomes after intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones versus traditional submandibular gland (SMG) resection. Study Design: A prospective randomized study. Methods: Forty‐four consecutive patients were diagnosed with proximal submandibular stone...
Saved in:
Published in: | The Laryngoscope 2010-11, Vol.120 (11), p.2189-2192 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1910-95dca9153232c9396b09556d0fb7a01abcbd81e9630301508b34d2fb2320e6383 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 2192 |
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | 2189 |
container_title | The Laryngoscope |
container_volume | 120 |
creator | Eun, Young Gyu Chung, Dae Han Kwon, Kee Hwan |
description | Objectives/Hypothesis:
To compare surgical outcomes after intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones versus traditional submandibular gland (SMG) resection.
Study Design:
A prospective randomized study.
Methods:
Forty‐four consecutive patients were diagnosed with proximal submandibular stones in the hilum of the submandibular gland by ultrasonography or computed tomography. All of the patients were randomized to undergo removal of the stones either by an intraoral approach (IORS group, 22 patients) or through SMG resection (SMGR group, 22 patients). We then compared the surgical outcomes between these two groups.
Results:
Stones in the IORS group were significantly smaller than those in the SMGR group. There was no significant difference in the distance of the stones from the hilum between groups. The mean operation time in the IORS group was significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group. The mean hospital stay of the IORS group was also significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group, and IORS patients felt significantly less pain than did SMGR patients. No patient experienced any complication after surgery with the exception of a single patient who experienced transient and mild neck swelling.
Conclusions:
Intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones has several advantages over SMG resection. Based on our results, we suggest that our intraoral removal method be selected as the primary procedure for the removal of proximal submandibular stones rather than SMG resection. Laryngoscope, 2010 |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/lary.21120 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>istex_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wiley_primary_10_1002_lary_21120_LARY21120</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>ark_67375_WNG_SHBB0QK4_9</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1910-95dca9153232c9396b09556d0fb7a01abcbd81e9630301508b34d2fb2320e6383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkF9PwjAUxRujiYi--An6BYa3Ld3WRyAKxkXjv6hPTbt2ZDpW0g6Eb28BY-LTPcn9nXtPDkKXBAYEgF41ym8HlBAKR6hHOCPJUAh-jHpxyZKc0_dTdBbCJwDJGIceMiOzVm2n5jZgV-G67bxyXjXY24Vbx-nW1uOw0gvVmlqv4gM8b6KOQLBlV7sWV87jpXebehH5_2joXGvDOTqpVBPsxe_so9eb65fJLCkepreTUZGURBBIBDelEjE1ZbQUTKQaBOepgUpnCojSpTY5sSJlwIBwyDUbGlrpiINNWc76iBzufteN3cqlj4n8VhKQu3Lkrhy5L0cWo6ePvYqe5OCpQ2c3fx7lv2SasYzLt_upfJ6Nx_B4N5SC_QAZD2sT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Eun, Young Gyu ; Chung, Dae Han ; Kwon, Kee Hwan</creator><creatorcontrib>Eun, Young Gyu ; Chung, Dae Han ; Kwon, Kee Hwan</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives/Hypothesis:
To compare surgical outcomes after intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones versus traditional submandibular gland (SMG) resection.
Study Design:
A prospective randomized study.
Methods:
Forty‐four consecutive patients were diagnosed with proximal submandibular stones in the hilum of the submandibular gland by ultrasonography or computed tomography. All of the patients were randomized to undergo removal of the stones either by an intraoral approach (IORS group, 22 patients) or through SMG resection (SMGR group, 22 patients). We then compared the surgical outcomes between these two groups.
Results:
Stones in the IORS group were significantly smaller than those in the SMGR group. There was no significant difference in the distance of the stones from the hilum between groups. The mean operation time in the IORS group was significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group. The mean hospital stay of the IORS group was also significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group, and IORS patients felt significantly less pain than did SMGR patients. No patient experienced any complication after surgery with the exception of a single patient who experienced transient and mild neck swelling.
Conclusions:
Intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones has several advantages over SMG resection. Based on our results, we suggest that our intraoral removal method be selected as the primary procedure for the removal of proximal submandibular stones rather than SMG resection. Laryngoscope, 2010</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-852X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-4995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/lary.21120</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>intraoral removal ; Level of Evidence: 1b ; stone ; Submandibular gland ; Submandibular gland, stone, intraoral removal</subject><ispartof>The Laryngoscope, 2010-11, Vol.120 (11), p.2189-2192</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2010 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1910-95dca9153232c9396b09556d0fb7a01abcbd81e9630301508b34d2fb2320e6383</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Eun, Young Gyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Dae Han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kwon, Kee Hwan</creatorcontrib><title>Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones</title><title>The Laryngoscope</title><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><description>Objectives/Hypothesis:
To compare surgical outcomes after intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones versus traditional submandibular gland (SMG) resection.
Study Design:
A prospective randomized study.
Methods:
Forty‐four consecutive patients were diagnosed with proximal submandibular stones in the hilum of the submandibular gland by ultrasonography or computed tomography. All of the patients were randomized to undergo removal of the stones either by an intraoral approach (IORS group, 22 patients) or through SMG resection (SMGR group, 22 patients). We then compared the surgical outcomes between these two groups.
Results:
Stones in the IORS group were significantly smaller than those in the SMGR group. There was no significant difference in the distance of the stones from the hilum between groups. The mean operation time in the IORS group was significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group. The mean hospital stay of the IORS group was also significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group, and IORS patients felt significantly less pain than did SMGR patients. No patient experienced any complication after surgery with the exception of a single patient who experienced transient and mild neck swelling.
Conclusions:
Intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones has several advantages over SMG resection. Based on our results, we suggest that our intraoral removal method be selected as the primary procedure for the removal of proximal submandibular stones rather than SMG resection. Laryngoscope, 2010</description><subject>intraoral removal</subject><subject>Level of Evidence: 1b</subject><subject>stone</subject><subject>Submandibular gland</subject><subject>Submandibular gland, stone, intraoral removal</subject><issn>0023-852X</issn><issn>1531-4995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkF9PwjAUxRujiYi--An6BYa3Ld3WRyAKxkXjv6hPTbt2ZDpW0g6Eb28BY-LTPcn9nXtPDkKXBAYEgF41ym8HlBAKR6hHOCPJUAh-jHpxyZKc0_dTdBbCJwDJGIceMiOzVm2n5jZgV-G67bxyXjXY24Vbx-nW1uOw0gvVmlqv4gM8b6KOQLBlV7sWV87jpXebehH5_2joXGvDOTqpVBPsxe_so9eb65fJLCkepreTUZGURBBIBDelEjE1ZbQUTKQaBOepgUpnCojSpTY5sSJlwIBwyDUbGlrpiINNWc76iBzufteN3cqlj4n8VhKQu3Lkrhy5L0cWo6ePvYqe5OCpQ2c3fx7lv2SasYzLt_upfJ6Nx_B4N5SC_QAZD2sT</recordid><startdate>201011</startdate><enddate>201011</enddate><creator>Eun, Young Gyu</creator><creator>Chung, Dae Han</creator><creator>Kwon, Kee Hwan</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201011</creationdate><title>Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones</title><author>Eun, Young Gyu ; Chung, Dae Han ; Kwon, Kee Hwan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1910-95dca9153232c9396b09556d0fb7a01abcbd81e9630301508b34d2fb2320e6383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>intraoral removal</topic><topic>Level of Evidence: 1b</topic><topic>stone</topic><topic>Submandibular gland</topic><topic>Submandibular gland, stone, intraoral removal</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Eun, Young Gyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Dae Han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kwon, Kee Hwan</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Eun, Young Gyu</au><au>Chung, Dae Han</au><au>Kwon, Kee Hwan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones</atitle><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle><addtitle>The Laryngoscope</addtitle><date>2010-11</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>120</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>2189</spage><epage>2192</epage><pages>2189-2192</pages><issn>0023-852X</issn><eissn>1531-4995</eissn><abstract>Objectives/Hypothesis:
To compare surgical outcomes after intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones versus traditional submandibular gland (SMG) resection.
Study Design:
A prospective randomized study.
Methods:
Forty‐four consecutive patients were diagnosed with proximal submandibular stones in the hilum of the submandibular gland by ultrasonography or computed tomography. All of the patients were randomized to undergo removal of the stones either by an intraoral approach (IORS group, 22 patients) or through SMG resection (SMGR group, 22 patients). We then compared the surgical outcomes between these two groups.
Results:
Stones in the IORS group were significantly smaller than those in the SMGR group. There was no significant difference in the distance of the stones from the hilum between groups. The mean operation time in the IORS group was significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group. The mean hospital stay of the IORS group was also significantly shorter than that of the SMGR group, and IORS patients felt significantly less pain than did SMGR patients. No patient experienced any complication after surgery with the exception of a single patient who experienced transient and mild neck swelling.
Conclusions:
Intraoral removal of proximal submandibular stones has several advantages over SMG resection. Based on our results, we suggest that our intraoral removal method be selected as the primary procedure for the removal of proximal submandibular stones rather than SMG resection. Laryngoscope, 2010</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><doi>10.1002/lary.21120</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0023-852X |
ispartof | The Laryngoscope, 2010-11, Vol.120 (11), p.2189-2192 |
issn | 0023-852X 1531-4995 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_wiley_primary_10_1002_lary_21120_LARY21120 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | intraoral removal Level of Evidence: 1b stone Submandibular gland Submandibular gland, stone, intraoral removal |
title | Advantages of intraoral removal over submandibular gland resection for proximal submandibular stones |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T13%3A17%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-istex_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Advantages%20of%20intraoral%20removal%20over%20submandibular%20gland%20resection%20for%20proximal%20submandibular%20stones&rft.jtitle=The%20Laryngoscope&rft.au=Eun,%20Young%20Gyu&rft.date=2010-11&rft.volume=120&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=2189&rft.epage=2192&rft.pages=2189-2192&rft.issn=0023-852X&rft.eissn=1531-4995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/lary.21120&rft_dat=%3Cistex_wiley%3Eark_67375_WNG_SHBB0QK4_9%3C/istex_wiley%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1910-95dca9153232c9396b09556d0fb7a01abcbd81e9630301508b34d2fb2320e6383%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |