['In this study, the authors introduce and evaluate the feasibility of endoscopic resection using the retroauricular approach for various benign lesions of the upper neck.', "A retrospective comparative analysis was performed on the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent surgery for upper neck masses as endoscopic resection using the retroauricular approach or conventional transcervical resection at the authors' center from January 2010 through August 2011. The primary outcome was the cosmetic satisfaction of the patients in each group. In addition, the feasibility of the procedure was evaluated by comparing the operation time; hospital stay; amount and duration of drainage; complications such as marginal mandibular nerve, lingual, or hypoglossal nerve palsy; paresthesia of the ear lobe; and wound problems such as hematoma and skin necrosis. Statistical analysis was performed by independent-samples t test and the Fisher exact test, and a P value less than .05 was considered statistically significant.", 'Thirty-six patients underwent endoscopic resection (endo group; 15 men, 21 women; mean age, 38.8 ± 15.0 years) and 40 patients underwent conventional transcervical resection (conventional group; 18 men, 22 women; mean age, 45.1 ± 14.1 years). The operating time in the endo group was longer than in the conventional group (P = .003). No significant difference was observed in the overall perioperative complications between the 2 groups. Cosmetic satisfaction evaluated with a graded scale showed much better results in the endo group (P < .001).'] Is endoscopic resection of upper neck masses via retroauricular approach feasible with excellent cosmetic outcomes?