HAL will be down for maintenance from Friday, June 10 at 4pm through Monday, June 13 at 9am. More information
Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Journal articles

Extended endonasal approach versus maxillary swing approach to the parapharyngeal space

Abstract : Background * The nasopharyngeal and parapharyngeal spaces are difficult for surgeons to access. Of the various external routes described, the maxillary swing has emerged as the gold standard because of its simplicity. However, its morbidity has led to the development of less invasive techniques. The purpose of our study was to compare the surgical anatomy of the maxillary swing with that of the endoscopic endonasal approach. * Methods * Each procedure was performed on 10 anatomic specimens. The exposure and the limits obtained were evaluated. A CT scan analysis was performed. * Results * The endoscopic endonasal approach extended the limits, offering wider exposure. The endoscopic endonasal approach made possible better visualization of deep structures and precise dissection of the parapharyngeal spaces. However, the maxillary swing provided better access to the oropharynx and could be completed 3 times faster. * Conclusion * The endoscopic endonasal approach provides excellent exposure, a wide dissection range, and precise definition of anatomic structures, making it an alternative of choice rather than the maxillary swing approach.
Complete list of metadata

Contributor : Eve Sorel Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Monday, July 22, 2019 - 3:08:07 PM
Last modification on : Tuesday, March 8, 2022 - 4:10:05 PM




Vivien Roger, Vincent Patron, Sylvain Moreau, Jeeve Kanagalingam, Emmanuel Babin, et al.. Extended endonasal approach versus maxillary swing approach to the parapharyngeal space. Archives of Otorhinolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, JAMA Network- American Medical Association, 2018, 40 (6), pp.1120-1130. ⟨10.1002/hed.25092⟩. ⟨hal-02190507⟩



Record views