Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41034633›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026

Parotid gland sialolithiasis: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis : Title page.

Giovanni Salzano, Veronica Scocca, Umberto Committeri, Stefania Troise, Luigi Angelo Vaira, Jerome R Lechien, Vincenzo Abbate, Giovanni Dell'Aversana Orabona

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Giovanni SalzanoMaxillofacial Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II of Naples, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy.
Veronica ScoccaMaxillofacial Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II of Naples, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy. veronica.scocca01@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-8717-7121
Umberto CommitteriMaxillofacial Surgery, Santa Maria Hospital, Unit, Terni, Italy.
Stefania TroiseMaxillofacial Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II of Naples, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy.
Luigi Angelo VairaMaxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Jerome R LechienDepartment of Surgery, University of Mons, Mons, Belgium.
Vincenzo AbbateMaxillofacial Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II of Naples, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy.
Giovanni Dell'Aversana OrabonaMaxillofacial Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University Federico II of Naples, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeParotid sialolithiasis represents unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to the anatomy of the gland and the proximity of the facial nerve. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various treatment modalities for parotid gland stones.

methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Scopus and Google Scholar. Eligible observational studies and clinical trials reporting on patients with parotid stones were included. The outcomes assessed included stone-free rate, symptom improvement and the presence of any complications. A single-arm random-effects meta-analysis was performed, focusing on endoscopy-only, endoscopy-assisted and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Bias risk was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

resultsA total of 42 studies involving 1,559 patients were analyzed. Endoscopy-assisted removal showed the highest stone-free rate (93%, 95%CI: 90-96) and symptom improvement (91%, 95%CI: 92-99) (p < 0.05). Combined endoscopic-external approaches were effective for complex stones but had higher complication rates (24%, 95% CI: 14-37). ESWL had a lower stone-free rate (58%) but aided long-term symptom control (p < 0.05). CT-navigation did not significantly enhance clearance (80%). Most complications were minor; no permanent facial nerve injuries were reported. The quality of the evidence was limited by heterogeneity and the lack of any randomized trials.

conclusionsEndoscopy-assisted and combined approaches offer effective, gland-preserving options for parotid sialolithiasis. ESWL and laser techniques remain adjunctive but warrant further research. Prospective, standardized trials are needed to define any optimal management strategies.

Indexed as

Parotid DiseasesSalivary Gland CalculiEndoscopyHumansLithotripsyParotid GlandCT-navigationEndoscopic surgeryExtracorporeal shock wave lithotripsyParotidSalivary glandSialolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID41034633
PMCPMC13002754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.