Premium
Outpatient vs inpatient parotidectomy: Systematic review and m eta‐analysis
Author(s) -
Benito Daniel A.,
Pasick Luke J.,
Bestourous Daniel,
Thakkar Punam,
Goodman Joseph F.,
Joshi Arjun S.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
head and neck
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.012
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1097-0347
pISSN - 1043-3074
DOI - 10.1002/hed.26482
Subject(s) - medicine , seroma , hematoma , outpatient surgery , cochrane library , surgery , meta analysis , systematic review , fistula , parotidectomy , general surgery , medline , complication , ambulatory , facial nerve , political science , law
The primary aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare complications between outpatient vs inpatient parotidectomy. A systematic review was performed to identify patients undergoing either outpatient or inpatient partodiectomy, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines, using PUBMED, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale. Postoperative complications (hematoma, seroma/sialocele, salivary fistula formation, Frey syndrome, surgical site infection [SSI]) were compared. Our search yielded 4958 nonduplicate articles, of which 13 studies were ultimately included (11 retrospective cohort, 2 prospective cohort), encompassing a total of 1323 patients (outpatient 46.33% vs inpatient 53.67%). There was no significant difference in total complications, hematoma, seroma, salivary fistula, or SSI rates between outpatient and inpatient groups. No significant difference in total complications was found between outpatient and inpatient groups when stratified by surgical approach (partial/superficial and total parotidectomy). Our findings suggest outpatient parotidectomy may be as safe as inpatient parotidectomy in appropriately selected patients.