Laser-Assisted Lithotripsy With Sialendoscopy: Systematic Review of YO-IFOS Head and Neck Study Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Sialolithiasis is the most common cause of symptomatic obstructive sialadenitis. Sialendoscopy represent a minimally invasive technique that has evolved significantly in the last 2 decades, with high success rates in managing sialolithiasis and allowing gland preservation. Lithotripsy assisted or not by laser represents the fragmentation of stone or lithiasis within the salivary duct followed immediately by removal of the fragmented pieces. Material and Methods: A systematic review investigating the role of laser-assisted lithotripsy with sialendoscopy (LAS) in the treatment of sialolithiasis was performed. Results: Sixteen papers meet inclusion criteria. The mean maximum diameter of lithiasis was 7.11 mm (min: 2 mm/max: 17 mm; standard deviation [SD]: 2.33; 95% CI = 1.573-4.463). Success rate described ranging from 71% to 100% with a mean of 87.3% (SD: 7.21; 95% CI: 5.326-11.158) and the gland preservation rate was 97%. Considering only “non retrievable–non floating stones” studies that include both parotid and submandibular stones: Eight clinical retrospectives, nonrandomized studies and 1 prospective, nonrandomized study report results from parotid and submandibular gland lithiasis. According to this, the most common gland involved was the submandibular gland (n = 153; 65.1%), in comparison to the parotid gland (n = 82; 34.8%). Conclusion: The current evidence supports LAS as a conservative, efficient, safe, and gland-preserving alternative technique, in experienced hands, for management of mid-size sialolith removal from major salivary glands, when the indication is appropriate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".