Advertisement

Importance and Impact of Appropriate Radiology in the Management of Branchial Cleft Anomalies

  • Namrita Mehmi
  • Rajeev KumarEmail author
  • Prem Sagar
  • Chirom Amit Singh
  • Rakesh Kumar
  • Alok Thakar
  • Suresh C. Sharma
Original Article
  • 37 Downloads

Abstract

Branchial cleft anomalies are common differential diagnosis of neck masses. However, depending on the origin (1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th arch), this pathology presents at different locations as cyst, sinus and fistula. Incomplete excision or incision and drainage of infected branchial cleft anomalies (cystic presentation) can lead to multiple recurrences. Appropriate radiology is imperative to make a correct diagnosis and to achieve complete excision to prevent recurrence. Our case series highlights the mode of presentation, appropriate radiology and management for each type of branchial cleft anomalies. Data of 27 patients with the diagnosis of branchial cleft anomaly and treated in the department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery in a tertiary care referral centre in last 5 years was analysed retrospectively. Demographic data in terms of age, sex, laterality, clinical presentation, duration of symptoms and radiological investigations if any were recorded. The mean age at presentation was 22.1 years in this series of 27 cases including six (22.2%) recurrent cases. Most common clinical presentation was discharging sinus (59.25%) followed by cystic neck swelling (33.3%). Second branchial cleft anomalies were commonest (51.8%) followed by first branchial cleft anomalies (29.6%). Appropriate radiology was available for 17 (62.9%) patients. Branchial cleft anomaly is an important differential diagnosis of neck mass. Appropriate radiology helps in complete excision and prevents recurrences. Recurrent cases pose surgical challenge owing to fibrosis from previous surgery which further increases the chances of incomplete excision.

Keywords

Branchial cleft anomalies Sinus Fistula Cyst Facial nerve monitoring 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Rajeev Kumar, Prem Sagar, Chirom Amit Singh, Rakesh Kumar, Alok Thakar, Suresh C Sharma declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Ragesh KP, Chana RS, Varshney PK, Naim M (2002) Head and neck masses in children: a clinicopathological study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 54(4):268–271PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prasad SC, Azeez A, Thada ND, Rao P, Bacciu A, Prasad KC (2014) Branchial anomalies: diagnosis and management. Int J Otolaryngol 237015:9Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Acierno SP, Waldhausen JHT (2007) Congenital cervical cysts, sinuses and fistulae. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 40:161–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waldhausen JHT (2006) Branchial cleft and arch anomalies in children. Semin Pediatr Surg 15:64–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kumar R, Sikka K, Sagar P, Kakkar A, Thakar A (2013) First branchial cleft anomalies: avoiding the misdiagnosis. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 65(3):260–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Triglia JM, Nicollas R, Ducroz V et al (1998) First branchial cleft anomalies: a study of 39 cases and a review of the literature. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 124:291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Prosser JD, Myer CM III (2015) Branchial cleft anomaliesand thymic cysts. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 48:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pereira KD, Losh GG, Oliver D, Poole MD (2004) Management of anomalies of the third and fourth branchial pouches. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 68(1):43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tucker HM, Skolnick ML (1973) Fourth branchial cleft (pharyngeal pouch) remnant. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 77(5):368–371Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nicoucar K, Giger R, Pope HG, Jaecklin T, Dulguerov P (2009) Management of congenital fourth branchial arch anomalies: a review and analysis of published cases. J Pediatr Surg 44(7):1432–1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choi SS, Zalzal GH (1995) Branchial anomalies: a review of 52 cases. Laryngoscope. 105(9):909–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Adams A, Mankad K, Offiah C, Childs L (2016) Branchial cleft anomalies: a pictorial review of embryological development and spectrum of imaging findings. Insights Imaging 7:69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guldfred L-A, Philipsen BB, Siim C (2012) Branchial cleft anomalies: accuracy of pre-operative diagnosis, clinical presentation and management. J Laryngol Otol 126:598–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen EY, Inglis AF, Ou H et al (2009) Endoscopic electrocauterization of pyriform fossa sinus tracts as definitive treatment. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 73(8):1151–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim KH, Sung MW, Koh TY et al (2000) Pyriform sinus fistula: management with chemocauterization of the internal opening. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 109(5):452–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Otolaryngology and Head Neck SurgeryAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations