Comparative Study Between Conventional Curettage Adenoidectomy Versus Endoscopic Microdebrider Assisted Adenoidectomy: Our Experience

Abstract

Adenoidectomy is one of the commonest surgical procedures performed by otolaryngologists however; its recurrence rates are very high. Our objective in this study was to compare safety and efficacy between conventional curettage and endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy. This was a prospective comparative parallel randomized control trial conducted at a tertiary care hospital from April 2017 to December 2018. We divided patients (N = 42) into two groups i.e. conventional adenoidectomy (group A) (n₁ = 21) and endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy (group B) (n₁ = 21) groups using the lottery method of randomization. Among 42 patients, 33 (79%) were male and 9 (21%) were female. The average operative time in group A was 16.15 min and in group B was 22.9 min with p value < 0.05. Average blood loss in group A was 35.57 ml and in group B was 37.14 ml. In group A, 1 (4.76%) of 21 patients developed temporary velopharyngeal insufficiency which was relieved after 4 weeks of surgery whereas in group B, 5 (23.8%) patients developed nasal bleed and 2 (9.52%) patients presented with nasal synechiae on follow-up. Eight (38%) patients in group A showed grade I adenoids after 3 weeks of surgery while group B showed complete clearance in all patients (p < 0.05). Conventional adenoidectomy has less intra-operative blood loss and shorter surgical time duration as compared to endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy but with higher chances of residual adenoid tissue.

Keywords: Adenoids; Conventional adenoidectomy; Endoscopic adenoidectomy; Microdebrider assisted.

Fig. 1

Pre and post operative images of grade 3 adenoids in conventional curettage adenoidectomy

Fig. 2

Pre and post operative images of grade 3 adenoids in endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy