Tissue sealant versus surgical drain following parotidectomy.

PURPOSE: Sialocele and salivary fistula are recognised complications of parotid surgery and have been reported to be more common with less extensive parotidectomy. We investigated the efficacy of tissue sealant(Cunniffe et al., 2019) 1 as an alternative to surgical drainage in terms of length of hospital stay (LOS), cost, and incidence of wound complications.

METHODS

The study comprised a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained parotidectomy database at a single tertiary Head and Neck referral centre between 2009 and 2020. Cases undergoing concomitant neck dissection or major skin resection were excluded. Patients were divided into Group 1 (without tissue sealant), and Group 2 (with tissue sealant). Patients were also divided based on extent of surgery 1) Extracapsular dissection/Partial superficial parotidectomy 2) Superficial/total parotidectomy.

RESULTS

Of 202 included patients, there were 146 in Group 1 (143 with drain), and 56 in Group 2 (7 with drain). Compared to Group 1, Group 2 had a significantly shorter LOS (mean 1.4 ± 0.98 versus 3.1 ± 1.29 days, p < 0.05) and estimated cost (€1386 versus €2736). There was no significant difference in the complication rates (15.8% Group 1 versus 10.7% Group 2, p = 0.50). Group 1 showed a higher incidence of complications in patients undergoing less extensive parotidectomy (19/70 versus 4/76, p = 0.02), whereas in Group 2, the difference was not significant (5/30 versus 1/26, p = 0.20).

CONCLUSION

The use of tissue sealant as an alternative to surgical drains after parotidectomy facilitates reduced LOS and cost savings without increase in morbidity.