Outpatient vs inpatient parotidectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Automated summary

The study aimed to compare complications between outpatient and inpatient parotidectomy, and found that outpatient parotidectomy may be as safe as inpatient parotidectomy in appropriately selected patients.