ArticleCureus2025
Extracapsular Dissection Versus Superficial and Total Parotidectomy for Benign Parotid Tumours: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extracapsular dissection (ECD) has emerged as a less invasive alternative to conventional parotidectomy techniques for the management of benign parotid tumours. This retrospective, single-centre study in Scotland, conducted between January 2015 and December 2022, compared the clinical outcomes of ECD with those of superficial (SP) and total parotidectomy (TP) across 55 patients treated by a single surgeon. Thirty-four patients underwent ECD, 17 SP, and 4 TP. Data on pathology, complications, surgical margins, and recovery were analysed, with the Freeman-Halton extension of Fisher's exact test applied to compare ECD and SP outcomes (p < .01). Patients were followed up for a mean duration of 4.8 years (median 4.5 years, range 1-9.5 years). ECD demonstrated favourable results, with lower rates of temporary facial nerve palsy (15%) compared to SP (35%) and TP (75%), and only one case of persistent palsy, noted in the ECD group. Although seromas were more frequent following ECD (18%), no haematomas or recurrences were observed in any cohort. Same-day discharge was achieved in 82% of ECD cases, significantly higher than SP (6%) and TP (0%) (p < .00001). Capsule integrity and tumour-free margins exceeded 88% across all groups, with no significant intergroup differences. Despite a smaller average tumour size in the ECD group, this did not affect outcomes. Overall, ECD provided equivalent oncological safety with superior recovery metrics, supporting its selective use in benign parotid disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.