2001
DOI: 10.1054/bjom.2001.0672
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Congenital atresia of the orifice of the submandibular duct:a report of 2 cases and review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many of the publications also contain details of treatments undertaken elsewhere prior to referral, and these have been included. Occasionally a postnatal ranula had been diagnosed as ductal atresia, 39,45 although with current knowledge, the real nature of these lesions is clear.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Many of the publications also contain details of treatments undertaken elsewhere prior to referral, and these have been included. Occasionally a postnatal ranula had been diagnosed as ductal atresia, 39,45 although with current knowledge, the real nature of these lesions is clear.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simple incision and drainage was unsuccessful 17,19,28,43,44 except for perinatal oral ranulas, 16,26,27,45 of which 27% were successfully treated. The reason for this success is not apparent, although possibly the mucosal epithelium is more proliferative perinatally and sometimes establishes an epithelially lined tract before the wound closes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors speculated that this might have been due to rupture of the sialocele during feeding. The majority of published reports attempted some form of sialodochostomy, ''unroofing,'' or ''marsupialization,'' i.e., creation of an opening from the salivary duct into the floor of mouth [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. In most cases, this was accomplished by simple stab incision into the cyst wall or by excision of the imperforate duct papilla.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1][2][3] Failure of canalization of the terminal end of the duct has been cited as the cause of this anomaly. 1 Mostly reported cases have been unilateral swellings manifesting at birth. Diagnosis is made primarily by physical examination, rarely magnetic resonance imaging is requested to outline ductal anatomy to diagnose duplication anomaly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%