2011
DOI: 10.1001/archoto.2010.238
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sialoendoscopy

Abstract: Small size, good mobility, round or oval, and distal location of a salivary stone in the main duct predict significantly greater probability of endoscopic removal and consequently are positive prognostic factors.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
2
3

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
(17 reference statements)
1
18
2
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The stones, which were all clinically and ultrasonographically classified as intra-parenchymal, were successfully retrieved from all but seven patients, in whom the failure was due to the fact that the stone could not be separated from the gland tissue despite the use of dedicated elevators. This good result is in line with our initial experience 1 and what has been reported by other authors 4 6 16 , and demonstrate that the procedure is effective in removing deep submandibular stones. Most of these can be removed without using a sialendoscope but, in 9% of cases, the bright guidance of the sialendoscopic unit facilitated the search for residual parenchymal microliths that had cracked during removal of the main stone or migrated backwards to the peri-hilar region.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The stones, which were all clinically and ultrasonographically classified as intra-parenchymal, were successfully retrieved from all but seven patients, in whom the failure was due to the fact that the stone could not be separated from the gland tissue despite the use of dedicated elevators. This good result is in line with our initial experience 1 and what has been reported by other authors 4 6 16 , and demonstrate that the procedure is effective in removing deep submandibular stones. Most of these can be removed without using a sialendoscope but, in 9% of cases, the bright guidance of the sialendoscopic unit facilitated the search for residual parenchymal microliths that had cracked during removal of the main stone or migrated backwards to the peri-hilar region.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In all forms of intra-corporeal lithotripsy, the effectiveness and duration of treatment depends first on the endoscopic accessibility, second on the size, shape and location of the stone and third on the anatomic relationships within the salivary duct system 20 41 42 . Regarding submandibular stones located near the mylohyoid bend, transoral duct surgery or ESWL are valid treatment alternatives and the use of intraductal lithotripsy must be weighed in every individual case or can be applied in combination with these 20 41 43 .…”
Section: Endoscopically Controlled Intra-corporeal Lithotripsymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like all of the other forms of intra-corporeal lithotripsy, the effectiveness and duration of treatment depend on the size, shape and location of the stone, and the anatomic relationships of the salivary duct system 20 41 42 .…”
Section: Endoscopically Controlled Intra-corporeal Lithotripsymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most common obstructive salivary gland disease is sialolith, while other etiologies include strictures, mucoid plug, and anatomic ductal abnormalities [2]. Mobile stones of size \5 mm, especially those located at the distal duct position, are generally considered to be removable by simple sialendoscopy without the interference of the original salivary duct structures [3]. In some difficult conditions like in larger stones ([5 mm), a combined sialendoscopic approach that includes ductal incision, may be necessary to remove the stone [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%