Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Dec;43(6):417-423.
doi: 10.14639/0392-100X-N2593. Epub 2023 Oct 10.

Assessment of middle ear function after conventional or endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy

Oj Giri  1 , S Vijendra Shenoy  1 , Navya Parvathareddy  1 , Praneetha Puvvula  1 , Deeksha Shetty  1 , Nayanika Reddy  1
Affiliations

Assessment of middle ear function after conventional or endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy

Oj Giri et al. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2023 Dec.

Abstract
in English, Italian

Objectives: To compare pre- and post-operative pure tone audiometric and impedance audiometric analysis following conventional and endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy and compare the outcomes.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with chronic adenoiditis were divided in groups of 25 each. Patients in the first group underwent conventional curettage adenoidectomy, while those in second group underwent endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy. Pre- and post-operative pure tone and impedance audiometry were performed for all patients and outcomes were compared.

Results: The endoscopic microdebrider assisted method resulted in significantly better outcomes compared to conventional curettage. Criteria such as hearing threshold (p value 0.004 at second follow-up), peak pressure (p value 0.045 at first follow-up) and tympanogram (p value 0.016) showed that the endoscopic method was better, while peak compliance (p value 0.340 at first follow-up) did not show any significant difference between groups.

Conclusions: The endoscopic microdebrider assisted method for adenoidectomy has a definite advantage of better visualisation resulting in better clearance of tissue, leading to enhanced middle ear function compared to conventional curettage.

Valutazione della funzione dell’orecchio medio dopo adenoidectomia convenzionale vs endoscopica con microdebrider.

Obiettivi: Confrontare i risultati dei test audiometrici tonali e di impedenzometria prima e dopo l’esecuzione di adenoidectomia convenzionale ed endoscopica con microdebrider.

Metodi: Cinquanta pazienti con diagnosi di ipertrofia adenoidea sono stati suddivisi in due gruppi di 25. Il primo gruppo è stato sottoposto ad adenoidectomia convenzionale, mentre nel secondo gruppo l’adenoidectomia è stata eseguita con microdebrider sotto visione endoscopica. Valutazioni audiologiche di audiometria tonale e impedenzometria sono state eseguite in tutti i pazienti prima e dopo l’intervento, e i risultati sono stati confrontati.

Risultati: L’adenoidectomia endoscopica ha mostrato risultati audiologici migliori con una differenza statisticamente significativa per quanto riguarda la soglia uditiva (p value 0,004 al secondo controllo), la pressione al picco (p value 0,045 al primo controllo), e il timpanogramma (p value 0,016), mentre la compliance al picco (p value 0,340 al primo controllo) non ha mostrato differenze tra i due gruppi.

Conclusioni: Rispetto all’adenoidectomia convenzionale, l’adenoidectomia endoscopica con microdebrider ha il vantaggio di una miglior visualizzazione, che determina una più completa rimozione del tessuto adenoideo e un miglioramento della funzionalità dell’orecchio medio.

Keywords: Eustachian tube; adenoidectomy; conductive hearing loss; microdebrider assisted; middle ear ventilation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Wadia J, Dabholkar Y. Comparison of conventional curettage adenoidectomy versus endoscopic powered adenoidectomy: a randomised single-blind study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2022;74(Suppl 2):1044-1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-02122-2 10.1007/s12070-020-02122-2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Datta R, Singh VP. Conventional versus endoscopic powered adenoidectomy: a comparative study. Med J Armed Forces India 2009;65:308-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-1237(09)80089-0 10.1016/S0377-1237(09)80089-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Manhas M, Deva FA, Sharma S, et al. Endoscopic adenoidectomy replacing the outdated curette adenoidectomy: comparison of the two methods at a tertiary care centre. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2022;74(Suppl 3):4788-4794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-022-03089-y 10.1007/s12070-022-03089-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saibene AM, Rosso C, Pipolo C, et al. Endoscopic adenoidectomy: a systematic analysis of outcomes and complications in 1006 patients. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2020;40:79-86. https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-N0150 10.14639/0392-100X-N0150 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Juneja R, Meher R, Raj A, Rathore P, et al. Endoscopic assisted powered adenoidectomy versus conventional adenoidectomy – a randomised controlled trial. J Laryngol Otol 2019;133:289-293. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215119000550 10.1017/S0022215119000550 - DOI - PubMed