Ultrasound-Guided Needle Aspiration vs. Surgical Incision of Parotid Abscesses

Objective: Standard treatment of parotideal abscesses consists of surgical drainage. This often has to be carried out in general anesthesia and carries the risk of iatrogenic injury of the facial nerve. Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is an alternative therapy. Up until now a lack of systematic data concerning this subject exists. The study at hand aims to answer the question whether needle aspiration is a viable alternative for surgical drainage. Methods: All patients who had been treated surgically (n = 39) or via ultrasound-guided needle aspiration (n = 18) at our clinic were included into this monocentric retrospective analysis. Results: There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.142) regarding the mean abscess volume in both groups (5.7 vs. 10.1 mL). Therapy of the abscesses on average required 1.88 (1-5) ultrasound-guided needle aspirations or 1.10 (1-4) surgical interventions. There was a trend to a shorter inpatient treatment period (5.88 vs. 7.33 days) after ultrasound-guided needle aspiration. This trend did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.301). Facial nerve alterations did not occur in any of the patients. Postoperative bleeding did never occur after needle aspirations but in 2% of the patients after surgical abscess revision. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is safe and effective in the treatment of parotid abscesses.

Automated summary

This study compares the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided needle aspiration and surgical drainage in the treatment of parotid abscesses. The results show that there is no significant difference in abscess volume and treatment frequency between the two methods, but ultrasound-guided needle aspiration may reduce the length of hospital stay. There were no cases of facial nerve injury in any of the patients, and the occurrence of postoperative bleeding was lower after needle aspiration.