Macroglossia Treatment & Management
- Author: Talib Najjar, DMD, MDS, PhD; Chief Editor: Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA more...
Medical therapy for macroglossia is useful only when the etiology of the disease is a clearly defined, medically treatable entity such as hypothyroidism, infection, or amyloidosis. No medical treatments have proven useful when the etiology is unclear or the histology reveals simple hypertrophy or hyperplasia.
Many minor procedures that can be performed in the office have been attempted on large tongues thought to contribute to obstructive sleep apnea. Such interventions include the use of sclerosing agents, cautery, or other forms of soft tissue destruction. These techniques are aimed at tongue bases slightly larger than the norm and not at the global enlargement of the tongue seen in macroglossia.
Malignant neoplasms certainly may be managed by surgery and chemoradiation, depending on their type and susceptibility, but benign neoplasms in the anterior part of the tongue are often resected surgically.
Mechanical therapy may be useful in macroglossia with hypotonicity due to hypoglossal nerve deficit. Such treatment can be carried out using complex electrical stimulation and construction of a palatal prosthesis, which can be connected to the stimulation device. When the prosthesis is placed in the mouth, the tongue reflexively seeks this foreign body, moving backward and upward to meet it. When the tongue touches the prosthesis, it activates a lingual electrode, which further stimulates the tongue into the backward and upward position.
The scope of this article includes surgery for macroglossia as it pertains to reducing the hyperplastic, hypertrophic tongue. Surgery for macroglossia in a patient with a neoplastic lesion requires oncologic resection and is not discussed.
Preoperative planning should include a thorough knowledge of the patient's tongue size and the desired decrease in size. Nearly all of the surgical techniques used today allow for variation in the amount of tissue removed based on intraoperative findings. As all surgeons are aware, it is easy to take more but not easy to put back what was removed.
Probably the most important decision in the preoperative plan is to determine whether intubation or tracheostomy will be the primary means of airway control. Tracheostomy is almost universally short term but may be necessary, especially if the posterior part of the tongue is involved.
Multiple shapes of keyhole tongue resection are utilized, depending on the size of macroglossia. All of these have proven to be effective in restoring tongue function, but some resection types have shown better results than others with regard to physiologic outcome and return to homeostasis.
The keyhole method of resection remains the most popular resection type. It reduces not only the anterior-posterior dimension of the tongue but also its width, yet the classic description of this procedure involves the resection of the tip of the tongue. Although this allows a greater resection of the anterior extent of the tongue, it also prevents the use of the important tip musculature for articulation and other fine motor movements. Central debulking of the tongue using wide-shaped, elliptical excisions in the middle two thirds may cause more significant and prolonged swelling.
The type of surgical resection favored by many surgeons is a variation of the keyhole resection that does not involve the tip of the tongue. However, if an enormous anterior projection of the tongue is present, this type of resection may not provide adequate size reduction. Extending the incision to involve the tip in such cases may be indicated.
To facilitate surgical excision, a 2-0 silk suture is placed through the midline of the tongue to help with retraction. Often, a second, more posterior suture is placed for additional support. The tongue is retracted out of the oral cavity, and at approximately half the distance between the tip of the tongue and the circumvallate papillae, local anesthetic with epinephrine is injected into the submucosa. After adequate time has passed for vasoconstriction, a longitudinal incision, only deep enough to penetrate the mucosa, is made at the same location.
The submucosal incision is extended to the base of the tongue, posterior to the circumvallate papillae. The incision is maintained within the midline on either side to prevent injury to the neurovascular bundles. The desired portion of the tongue is excised with scalpel or laser. However, this author favors the use of fast tissue transection with the LigaSure fusion impactor, which permits large portions of the tongue musculature to be excised with little or no bleeding.
After the excised portion of the tongue is removed, the adjacent segments are approximated and sutured from inside out with 4-0 chromic and Vicryl sutures.
Swelling is the greatest postoperative threat to the patient, although if a tracheostomy is performed prior to surgery, this threat is largely bypassed.
Antibiotics and steroids are administered postoperatively to the patient, while limiting tongue motion after surgery also aids in decreasing inflammation and pain. However, because the tongue is a muscle, a quick return to function greatly aids in shortening the time to normal recovery.
Cold, clear liquids are excellent for early soothing of the tongue. When tongue swelling no longer presents a threat to the airway and the patient is able to tolerate an appropriate oral diet, the patient may be released from the hospital. A hospital stay of several days may be required, particularly in pediatric patients.
Follow-up care consists essentially of routine monitoring of wound healing and largely depends on the surgical method used for reduction. This author routinely sees patients weekly for a month and then monthly until total recovery has been achieved.
Depending on the complications of the macroglossia, the patient may also need to be monitored by a dentist or oral and maxillofacial surgeon. In addition, because of the enormous range of functions of the tongue, referral to a speech therapist may be appropriate, especially for children who demonstrate preoperative speech impediments.
The most common complication of macroglossia surgery is postoperative swelling. For this reason, the patient may need to remain intubated for a few days. Tracheostomy clearly obviates the need for postoperative intubation but should be considered aggressive treatment only to be used in appropriate patients.
The tongue is a highly vascular organ and remarkably resistant to infection. Even in a contaminated field, infection is not likely. However, antibiotics given should cover for gram-positive and anaerobic organisms. Both amoxicillin and clindamycin have adequate coverage for most patients.
Despite the tongue's vascularity, hematoma is not very common, because of the compressive strength inherent in the tongue musculature. The tongue has an enormous capacity for rapid healing due to enhanced vascularity. However, if a hematoma does occur, it represents an immediate airway risk and should be treated as an emergency.
Inappropriate reduction is another surgical complication. Resecting too much of the tongue may be more detrimental than resecting too little, as this may reduce function, especially with regard to mastication, deglutition, and articulation. However, because of the remarkable ability of the tongue to respond to its oral environment despite its size, functional hypertrophy will later compensate for the removal of too much tissue.
Although injury to the hypoglossal nerve is rare, such injury, if it occurs, leads to unilateral and occasionally bilateral loss of tongue function and mobility. Injury to the lingual nerve leads to sensation loss.
Outcome and Prognosis
The literature is riddled with small series studies that report mostly good results in macroglossia surgery. Although immediate postoperative dysphagia and drooling have been reported, most studies have shown that surgical procedures for macroglossia lead to improved cosmesis, speech, mastication and feeding.
Prada CE, Zarate YA, Hopkin RJ. Genetic causes of macroglossia: diagnostic approach. Pediatrics. 2012 Feb. 129(2):e431-7. [Medline].
Kagan KO, Berg C, Dufke A, et al. Novel fetal and maternal sonographic findings in confirmed cases of Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. Prenat Diagn. 2015 Jan 6. [Medline].
Follmar A, Dentino K, Abramowicz S, et al. Prevalence of sleep-disordered breathing in patients with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Sep. 25(5):1814-7. [Medline].
Heggie AA, Vujcich NJ, Portnof JE, Morgan AT. Tongue reduction for macroglossia in Beckwith Wiedemann syndrome: review and application of new technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Feb. 42(2):185-91. [Medline].
Byrne PJ, Bernstein PE. The use of medicinal leeches to treat macroglossia secondary to blunt trauma. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001 Dec. 125(6):649-50. [Medline].
Cable BB, Mair EA. Radiofrequency ablation of lymphangiomatous macroglossia. Laryngoscope. 2001 Oct. 111(10):1859-61. [Medline].
Elinav E, Rabinowitz Y, Lorberbaum M. Episodic macroglossia as the sole manifestation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-induced angioedema. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2004 Mar. 113(3 Pt 1):223-4. [Medline].
Farronato G, Salvadori S, Giannini L, Maspero C. Congenital macroglossia: surgical and orthodontic management. Prog Orthod. 2012 May. 13(1):92-8. [Medline].
Gadban H, Gilbey P, Talmon Y. Acute edema of the tongue: a life-threatening condition. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2003 Jul. 112(7):651-3. [Medline].
Gasparini G, Saltarel A, Carboni A. Surgical management of macroglossia: discussion of 7 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002 Nov. 94(5):566-71. [Medline].
Harada K, Enomoto S. A new method of tongue reduction for macroglossia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995 Jan. 53(1):91-2. [Medline].
Iwuchukwu I, Ardelt A, Cueva W, et al. Macroglossia associated with brainstem injury. Neurocrit Care. 2014 Feb. 20(1):106-10. [Medline].
Jian XC. Surgical management of lymphangiomatous or lymphangiohemangiomatous macroglossia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005 Jan. 63(1):15-9. [Medline].
Kacker A, Honrado C, Martin D, Ward R. Tongue reduction in Beckwith-Weidemann syndrome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2000 Jun 9. 53(1):1-7. [Medline].
Limbrock GJ, Fischer-Brandies H, Avalle C. Castillo-Morales' orofacial therapy: treatment of 67 children with Down syndrome. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1991 Apr. 33(4):296-303. [Medline].
Matsumoto K, Morita KI, Jinno S, Omura K. Sensory changes after tongue reduction for macroglossia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012 Aug 15. [Medline].
Maturo SC, Mair EA. Submucosal minimally invasive lingual excision: an effective, novel surgery for pediatric tongue base reduction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2006 Aug. 115(8):624-30. [Medline].
Mixter RC, Ewanowski SJ, Carson LV. Central tongue reduction for macroglossia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993 May. 91(6):1159-62. [Medline].
Morgan WE. Macroglossia. 1992. Available at: http://www.bcm.tmc.edu/oto/. [Full Text].
Morgan WE, Friedman EM, Duncan NO, Sulek M. Surgical management of macroglossia in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Mar. 122(3):326-9. [Medline].
Moura CG, Moura TG, Duraes AR, Souza SP. Exuberant macroglossia in a patient with primary systemic amyloidosis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005 May-Jun. 23(3):428. [Medline].
Pau M, Reinbacher KE, Feichtinger M, Kärcher H. Surgical treatment of macroglossia caused by systemic primary amyloidosis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012 Jun 21. [Medline].
Ring ME. The treatment of macroglossia before the 20th century. Am J Otolaryngol. 1999 Jan-Feb. 20(1):28-36. [Medline].
Rizer FM, Schechter GL, Richardson MA. Macroglossia: etiologic considerations and management techniques. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1985 Mar. 8(3):225-36. [Medline].
Severtson M, Petruzzelli GJ. Macroglossia. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Mar. 114(3):501-2. [Medline].
Siddiqui A, Pensler JM. The efficacy of tongue resection in treatment of symptomatic macroglossia in the child. Ann Plast Surg. 1990 Jul. 25(1):14-7. [Medline].
Tei E, Yamataka A, Komuro Y. Huge lymphangioma of the tongue: a case report. Asian J Surg. 2003 Oct. 26(4):228-30. [Medline].
Tomlinson JK, Morse SA, Bernard SP, Greensmith AL, Meara JG. Long-term outcomes of surgical tongue reduction in Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Mar. 119(3):992-1002. [Medline].
Ueyama Y, Mano T, Nishiyama A, Tsukamoto G, Shintani S, Matsumura T. Effects of surgical reduction of the tongue. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999 Dec. 37(6):490-5. [Medline].
Van Lierde K, Galiwango G, Hodges A, et al. Impact of tongue reduction on overall speech intelligibility, articulation and oromyofunctional behavior in 4 children with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2012. 64(2):55-63. [Medline].
Vermeersch G, Menovsky T, De Ridder D, et al. Life-threatening macroglossia after posterior fossa surgery: a surgical positioning problem?. B-ENT. 2014. 10(4):309-13. [Medline].
Vogel JE, Mulliken JB, Kaban LB. Macroglossia: a review of the condition and a new classification. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1986 Dec. 78(6):715-23. [Medline].
Wang J, Goodger NM, Pogrel MA. The role of tongue reduction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Mar. 95(3):269-73. [Medline].
Weiss LS, White JA. Macroglossia: a review. J La State Med Soc. 1990 Aug. 142(8):13-6. [Medline].
Wolford LM, Cottrell DA. Diagnosis of macroglossia and indications for reduction glossectomy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996 Aug. 110(2):170-7. [Medline].