Outpatient versus Inpatient Parotidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Risk factors and outcomes after surgery for malignant neoplasm of the parotid gland: An ACS-NSQIP study

BACKGROUND

Malignant neoplasms of the parotid gland (MPG) are clinically challenging due to aggressive growth and metastasis. Despite tumor resection being the primary treatment, there is a paucity of studies on postsurgical outcomes and preoperative risk factors for MPG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients who underwent MPG surgery between 2008 and 2021. 30-day postoperative outcomes and risk factors predisposing to the occurrence of complications were assessed.

RESULTS

The study population included 3052 patients, the majority of whom were males (n = 1842; 60%) and White (n = 2017; 66%). The average age was 63 ± 16 years. The most common comorbidities were obesity (n = 1182; 39%) and hypertension (n = 1533; 50%). Surgical procedures were performed predominantly in the inpatient setting (n = 1773; 58%) by ENT surgeons (n = 2767; 91%). Overall, complications were reported in 6.8% (n = 209) of patients. Inpatient setting (p < 0.001), renal failure (p < 0.001), smoking (p = 0.012), as well as increased creatinine (p < 0.001) and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels (p = 0.001) were identified as risk factors for complications. In addition, concurrent microsurgical procedures such as flap surgery and/or nerve grafting significantly increased the risk of postoperative adverse events (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis revealed that complication rates were associated with high creatinine and BUN levels, inpatient surgery, renal failure, higher American Society of Anesthesiology classes, and smoking. We also found that concurrent microsurgical procedures were predictive factors for complications. These findings can inform patient counseling, preoperative planning, and risk stratification.

Outpatient partial parotidectomies are feasible in a well-selected population: a French experience

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and patient satisfaction of outpatient partial parotidectomies in a French university hospital, addressing the lack of national data on such procedures amidst a push for increased ambulatory surgeries.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted, involving patients undergoing partial parotidectomy for non-malignant tumors from March 2021 to May 2023. Inclusion was based on surgical, medical, and social criteria. A control group was also reviewed for comparison. The study followed a standardized surgical and anesthesia protocol, with patient satisfaction assessment.

RESULTS

From an initial pool of 104, 64 patients passed surgical screening, and 45 remained after anesthesia and social considerations, marking a 70% inclusion rate for outpatient care. The success rate of outpatient procedures stood at 98%, with complication incidences mirroring those of inpatient counterparts. 91% of participants expressed high satisfaction, scoring their experiences 7/10 or above.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient partial parotidectomies within the French health infrastructure are both viable and align with patient expectations, reinforcing the shift towards ambulatory surgery.

The timing of drain removal in parotidectomies: outcomes of removal at 4 h post-operatively and a Canadian survey of practice patterns

BACKGROUND

The post-operative management of parotidectomies is highly provider dependent. No guidelines are currently available for timing of parotid drain removal. This study aimed to assess: (1) outcomes and complications after early drain removal (< 4 h, post-operative day [POD] 0) versus late drain removal (POD ≥ 1); (2) current Canadian provider practices.

METHODS

A single surgeons ten-year parotidectomy practice was reviewed, spanning his practice change from routine POD ≥ 1 drain removal to POD 0 removal, with extraction of patient demographic, disease, and complication variables. An anonymous, cross-sectional survey on parotid drain practices was distributed to Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery members. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon Rank Sum, and unpaired student's t-tests were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 526 patients were included and 44.7% (235/526) had drains removed POD 0. There was no significant difference in hematoma or seroma rates between the POD 0 and POD ≥ 1 drain removal cohorts. The national survey on parotid drain management had 176 responses. The majority (67.9%) reported routinely using drains after parotidectomy and 62.8% reported using a drain output based criteria for removal. The most common cut-off output was 30 ml in 24 h (range 5-70 ml).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in hematoma or seroma rates for patients with parotid drains removed on POD 0 versus POD ≥ 1. Our national survey found significant variation in Canadian parotidectomy drain removal practices, which may be an area that can be further assessed to minimize hospital resources and improve patient care.

Safety outcomes and patient convenience in outpatient parotidectomy

BACKGROUND

Parotidectomies have historically been performed on an inpatient basis despite being well-tolerated surgeries with minimal postoperative wound care and low rates of complications at high-volume institutions. Past studies have supported the safety of outpatient surgery for parotidectomy but have been limited to superficial parotidectomy and have not addressed the patient experience surrounding the surgical intervention such as pre-operative and post-operative care and communication.

PURPOSE

This study assesses the impact of outpatient superficial, deep, and partial parotid surgery on various parameters including surgical safety, distance traveled for care, utilization of telehealth, and patient-initiated communication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study from January 2020 to October 2021. Patients undergoing superficial lobe, deep lobe, and partial parotidectomies for benign and malignant pathologies were divided into inpatient and outpatient cohorts. A multivariable model examined the relationship between admission status and surgical complications, adjusted for age, sex, and tumor size.

RESULTS

159 patients total, 94 outpatient and 65 inpatients. No statistical difference in rates of surgical complications with the exception of salivary leak. There was an increased rate of salivary leak reported in the inpatient group (OR 5.4, 95 % CI 1.6 to 18.0, p = 0.01). Mean patient travel distance of 354 miles one-way. Post-operatively, 76 % were evaluated via video visit. Following discharge, >55 % of patients initiated communication with the surgical team, which was not statistically different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient parotidectomy is safe and can be more convenient, but telehealth communication must be balanced with rigorous attention to patient education.

Disparities in Index of Care for Otolaryngologic Procedures Performed in Ambulatory and Inpatient Settings

OBJECTIVE

To compare the same surgical procedure performed in ambulatory and inpatient settings to determine the demographics associated with this selection, the differences in 30-day revisit rates, and the total 30-day cost of care.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Ambulatory and inpatient centers in Florida, New York, and Maryland.

METHODS

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, the State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database, and the State Inpatient Database were used to identify patients undergoing commonly performed otolaryngologic procedures in 2016. The State Emergency Department Database and State Inpatient Database were used to identify 30-day revisits.

RESULTS

A total of 55,311 patients underwent an otolaryngologic procedure: 51,136 (92.4%) ambulatory and 4175 (7.6%) inpatient. Adjusted odds of receiving care in the ambulatory setting was significantly lower for Black patients (odds ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.55-0.85]; P = .001) and nonspecified other races (odds ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.52-0.95]; P = .001) as compared with White patients. Women had 1.16-higher adjusted odds of undergoing a procedure in the ambulatory setting (95% CI, 1.05-1.29; P = .005). Insurance status and income were associated with location of care in the subcategorization of head and neck surgery. Adjusted inpatient procedure costs were significantly more than ambulatory (median, $59,112 vs $14,899); 30-day adjusted costs were $71,333.07 (95% CI, $56,223.99-$86,42.15; P < .001) more expensive for inpatient procedures vs ambulatory; and the adjusted 30-day odds of revisit were 2.23 times greater (95% CI, 1.44-3.44; P < .001) for ambulatory surgery across all procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities exist in the use of ambulatory settings to provide otolaryngologic surgery. Additional research is required to ensure equitable triaging of surgical care setting.

Observation Rather than Surgery for Benign Parotid Tumors: Why, When, and How

Surgery is the preferred treatment of benign parotid lesions, but it carries a risk of complications. Therefore, the approach toward the surgery of these lesions should seek to avoid complications. There are no guidelines or recommendations for when not to operate. Integration of comorbidities and other factors shift the scales from surgery toward observation in a small subset of patients presenting with parotid tumors. When observation is chosen, the patient should be followed frequently and cautiously, and the surgeon should be prepared to change strategy to surgical excision if in doubt.

Outpatient Parotidectomy, a Safety and Financial Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to investigate the safety, efficacy, and potential cost-savings of the outpatient parotidectomy procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent a parotidectomy at a large academic center from 2015 through 2019 including demographic data, postoperative complications, drain placement, readmission, and financial cost. A comparison was performed between patients who underwent an outpatient vs inpatient parotidectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 335 patients underwent parotidectomy (136 outpatient; 199 inpatient). Comparison of patient demographics, common comorbidities, tumor size, tumor type, postoperative complications, and readmission rate was similar between the inpatient and outpatient cohorts. The overall mean cost difference between inpatient parotidectomy and outpatient parotidectomy for all years was $1528.58 (95%CI: $1139-$1916).

CONCLUSION

The outpatient parotidectomy procedure has a comparable safety profile to the inpatient procedure while providing a significant cost-savings benefit.

[Outpatient Surgery in German ENT]

Currently there is an intense discussion ongoing to enhance and expand outpatient surgery in the ENT in Germany, which is the intention by several politicians. The goal is to achieve a frequency of outpatient surgery comparable to an international level.To achieve this goal, acceptance of outpatient interventions by both, surgeons and patients is required, particularly in regard of equal quality standards and patient safety requirements.In the following review the organization, outcome, quality management and strategies for different ENT outpatient surgery worldwide is analyzed. Basically, outpatient surgery is organized in different ways: office-based-procedures in local anesthesia, procedures in ambulatory surgery center settings as standalone facilities or in connection with and adjacent to a hospital with possible inpatient treatment. Contact and resident times of the patients in the outpatient surgery centers differ between some hours through 23 hours. A deliberated and careful selection of patients which are suitable for outpatient procedures is required and should address comorbidities, medications, social circumstances, health literacy of the patient and its relatives, and distance from home to the hospital. A careful and strict quality management is mandatory which comprises the entire process from patient selection through patient entry, surgery, discharge and postoperative care in a multidisciplinary setting.Zur besseren Lesbarkeit des Textes wird bei geschlechterbezogenen Bezeichnungen die männliche Form benutzt. Es sind jedoch in gleicher Rangfolge auch das jeweilige weibliche Geschlecht oder andere Geschlechtsausprägungen gemeint.

Outpatient versus inpatient superficial parotidectomy: clinical and pathological characteristics

Background

Superficial parotidectomy has a potential to be performed as an outpatient procedure. The objective of the study is to evaluate the safety and selection profile of outpatient superficial parotidectomy compared to inpatient parotidectomy.

Methods

A retrospective review of individuals who underwent superficial parotidectomy between 2006 and 2016 at a tertiary care center was conducted. Primary outcomes included surgical complications, including transient/permanent facial nerve palsy, wound infection, hematoma, seroma, and fistula formation, as well as medical complications in the postoperative period. Secondary outcome measures included unplanned emergency room visits and readmissions within 30 days of operation due to postoperative complications.

Results

There were 238 patients included (124 in outpatient and 114 in inpatient group). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of gender, co-morbidities, tumor pathology or tumor size. There was a trend towards longer distance to the hospital from home address (111 Km in inpatient vs. 27 in outpatient, mean difference 83 km [95% CI,- 1 to 162 km], p = 0.053). The overall complication rates were comparable between the groups (24.2% in outpatient group vs. 21.1% in inpatient, p = 0.56). There was no difference in the rate of return to the emergency department (3.5% vs 5.6%, p = 0.433) or readmission within 30 days (0.9% vs 0.8%, p = 0.952).

Conclusion

Superficial parotidectomy can be performed safely as an outpatient procedure without elevated risk of complications.

Graphical abstract