ObjectivesPresent follow‐up data comparing transoral and transfacial parotid gland procedures for stone removal to offer insight addressing technical considerations and complications.MethodsRetrospective study of a consecutive series of surgical treatments for parotid sialolithiasis from 2013 to 2018 at an academic institution by one surgeon provided review of 16 transoral and 10 transfacial procedures supplemented by long‐term follow‐up through telephone or mail. Clinical and radiographic parameters, additional treatment, and persistence of symptoms were evaluated.ResultsFour of 10 patients treated with the transfacial approach had parotid‐cutaneous fistulas addressed with transdermal scopolamine patches and pressure dressings (one also with intraductal steroid infusion) with closure at a median of 12.5 days. A fifth fistula failed to resolve at 23 days and was addressed with parotidectomy. All 8 patients who were contacted (median: 106 months) reported complete resolution of symptoms. None had facial weakness.Six of 16 patients treated by a transoral approach had persistent stone fragments at the conclusion of operation. Four of these 6 patients underwent subsequent procedures (two transoral, one transfacial, one parotidectomy). Among the 11 patients who responded to long‐term follow‐up (median: 107 months), one reported mild symptoms insufficient to request treatment. Larger stone size coupled with proximal location correlated with the conversion from transoral to include transfacial approach.ConclusionPatients with retained stone remnants at the conclusion of transoral stone removal are more likely to require additional procedures that result in long‐term favorable results. The transfacial approach to stone removal offers long‐term favorable results following the common short‐term complication of salivary fistula.Level of EvidenceOCEBM Level 4.
