Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 37  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 581-587

A new evolving incision for partial superficial parotidectomy


1 Department of Surgery, Medical Research Institute Hospital, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
2 Department of Radiodiagnosis and Intervention, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Ahmed Shaaban
Department of Surgery, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, 165 El- Horreya Avenue, El-Hadra, Alexandria
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ejs.ejs_101_18

Rights and Permissions

Background The lazy S incision (Blair’s incision) is the standard incision for parotidectomy. This incision gives an excellent exposure of the parotid gland, but may leave an ugly cervical scar, which may impair the patient’s quality of life. Many incisions had been proposed as alternatives to Blair’s incision with the aim of getting a sound scar but without impairing the adequacy of exposure of the operative field. Periauricular incision is one of these incisions which was compared in this study with the standard lazy S incision for partial superficial parotidectomy (PSP) regarding feasibility of the procedure, operative time, postoperative complications, and patient’s satisfaction with cosmetic appearance of the scar. Patients and methods The present study was a prospective, randomized, controlled study which included 60 patients with the diagnosis of superficial benign parotid lesions who were candidates for PSP. Patients were divided into two groups. Group A included 30 patients who underwent PSP via periauricular incision and group B included 30 patients who underwent PSP via the standard Blair’s incision. Results Preoperative data of patients were comparable in both groups. PSP was not feasible via the periauricular incision in two (6.66%) patients of group A. Completion of the procedure required adding a hairline incision in these two patients. Operative time was significantly longer in group A compared with group B (P=0.026). Both groups were comparable to each other’s regarding postoperative complications. Patient’s satisfaction with cosmetic appearance of scar using the visual analog scale was significantly higher in group A compared with group B (P<0.001). Conclusion PSP can be performed safely via a periauricular incision with a longer operating time, comparable postoperative complications, and significantly higher patient satisfaction with cosmetic appearance of scar compared with the standard Blair’s incision.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed44    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded12    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal