Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modified facelift incision for partial parotidectomy versus bayonet-shaped incision: a comparison using visual analog scale

  • Head and Neck
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study is to show differences between a modified facelift incision (MFI) for partial parotidectomy versus a bayonet-shaped incision (BSI). 24 patients presenting with a parotid tumor were surgically treated with a partial parotidectomy using a MFI. We generated a “matched pair control group” regarding age, tumor size and gender, who received a BSI. A questionnaire was sent to all patients and relevant data reviewed. The cosmetic satisfaction on a VAS with a MFI was 9.74 (±0.47) compared to BSI with 7.63 (±2.44, p = 0.004). The scoring in the two subgroups “visible scar” and “people noticed my surgery” was significantly better in the MFI group The postoperative skin numbness, skin depression, facial nerve function postoperatively showed no statistical differences. The MFI for parotid tumors has a better outcome than the BSI regarding cosmetic satisfaction and visible scarring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baumann I et al (2009) Development and validation of the Parotidectomy Outcome Inventory 8 (POI-8). Measurement of quality of life after parotidectomy in benign diseases. HNO 57(9):884–888

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jost G, Legent F, Baudelot S (1968) Filling of residual depressions after parotidectomy by a sterno-cleido-mastoid flap. Ann Chir Plast 13(3):187–191

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jost G, Guenon P, Gentil S (1999) Parotidectomy: a plastic approach. Aesthet Plast Surg 23(1):1–4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Appiani E, Delfino MC (1984) Plastic incisions for facial and neck tumors. Ann Plast Surg 13(4):335–352

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Meningaud JP, Bertolus C, Bertrand JC (2006) Parotidectomy: assessment of a surgical technique including facelift incision and SMAS advancement. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 34(1):34–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Terris DJ, Tuffo KM, Fee WE Jr (1994) Modified facelift incision for parotidectomy. J Laryngol Otol 108(7):574–578

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Grover N, D’Souza A (2013) Facelift approach for parotidectomy: an evolving aesthetic technique. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148(4):548–556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bianchi B et al (2011) Improving esthetic results in benign parotid surgery: statistical evaluation of facelift approach, sternocleidomastoid flap, and superficial musculoaponeurotic system flap application. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69(4):1235–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Honig JF (2004) Facelift approach with a hybrid SMAS rotation advancement flap in parotidectomy for prevention of scars and contour deficiency affecting the neck and sweat secretion of the cheek. J Craniofac Surg 15(5):797–803

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lohuis PJ et al (2009) Superficial parotidectomy via facelift incision. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 118(4):276–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Amin A et al (2011) Parotidectomy for benign parotid tumors: an aesthetic approach. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst 23(2):67–72

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lin TC et al (2011) Intra-auricular modification of facelift incision with sternocleidomastoid flap–a cosmetic approach for parotidectomy: how we do it. Clin Otolaryngol 36(4):375–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. To EW, Pang PC, Chu GM (2000) The use of modified rhytidectomy for parotidectomy. Br J Plast Surg 53(1):80

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee SY et al (2011) The extended indication of parotidectomy using the modified facelift incision in benign lesions: retrospective analysis of a single institution. World J Surg 35(10):2228–2237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wasson J et al (2010) Cervicomastoidfacial versus modified facelift incision for parotid surgery: a patient feedback comparison. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 92(1):40–43

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhi K et al (2011) Face-lift incision combined with sternomastoid muscular flap in parotidectomy. Aesthet Plast Surg 35(4):558–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Iro H et al (2013) Follow-up of parotid pleomorphic adenomas treated by extracapsular dissection. Head Neck 35(6):788–793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mantsopoulos K et al (2015) Evolution and changing trends in surgery for benign parotid tumors. Laryngoscope 125(1):122–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Olcay Cem Bulut, Peter Plinkert & Philippe A. Federspil

Authors
  1. Olcay Cem Bulut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Plinkert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philippe A. Federspil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philippe A. Federspil.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no other funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bulut, O.C., Plinkert, P. & Federspil, P.A. Modified facelift incision for partial parotidectomy versus bayonet-shaped incision: a comparison using visual analog scale. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273, 3269–3275 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3878-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3878-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation