Ultrasound-Guided Needle Aspiration vs. Surgical Incision of Parotid Abscesses.

OBJECTIVE: Standard treatment of parotideal abscesses consists of surgical drainage. This often has to be carried out in general anesthesia and carries the risk of iatrogenic injury of the facial nerve. Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is an alternative therapy. Up until now a lack of systematic data concerning this subject exists. The study at hand aims to answer the question whether needle aspiration is a viable alternative for surgical drainage. METHODS: All patients who had been treated surgically (n = 39) or via ultrasound-guided needle aspiration (n = 18) at our clinic were included into this monocentric retrospective analysis. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.142) regarding the mean abscess volume in both groups (5.7 vs. 10.1 mL). Therapy of the abscesses on average required 1.88 (1-5) ultrasound-guided needle aspirations or 1.10 (1-4) surgical interventions. There was a trend to a shorter inpatient treatment period (5.88 vs. 7.33 days) after ultrasound-guided needle aspiration. This trend did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.301). Facial nerve alterations did not occur in any of the patients. Postoperative bleeding did never occur after needle aspirations but in 2% of the patients after surgical abscess revision. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is safe and effective in the treatment of parotid abscesses.      «

OBJECTIVE: Standard treatment of parotideal abscesses consists of surgical drainage. This often has to be carried out in general anesthesia and carries the risk of iatrogenic injury of the facial nerve. Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is an alternative therapy. Up until now a lack of systematic data concerning this subject exists. The study at hand aims to answer the question whether needle aspiration is a viable alternative for surgical drainage. METHODS: All patients who had been treated s...     »