Comparative study between conventional adenoidectomy and adenoidectomy using micro-debrider

• Main Authors: Essam A. Abo Elmagd, Mahmoud S. Khalifa, Beshoy K. Abeskharoon, Abdelrahman A. El Tahan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SpringerOpen 2021-06-01
• Series: The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology
• Subjects: Adenoidectomy; Conventional; Micro-debrider
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43163-021-00102-z
• ISSN: 1012-5574; 2090-8539

Abstract Background Adenoidectomy is a common ENT procedure. This article aims to evaluate micro-debrider-assisted adenoidectomy as a substitute for the conventional curettage method. Results The study aimed to compare between two study groups: micro-debrider-assisted adenoidectomy (group A) and conventional adenoidectomy (group B). The average time needed in group A was 34.1 min while it was 22.83 min in group B (p<0.001). The average amount of blood lost in group A was 29.57 ml and 16.67 ml in group B (p<0.001). The resection was nearly complete in group A, while in group B, five (16.66%) cases had more than 50% of the adenoid tissue left behind. Four cases in group B had damage to collaterals while in group A no major injuries were noted. Postoperative pain has only been studied in cases where adenoidectomy solely was done. Candidates in group A (n=8) reported a pain score of 3.5-3.09 whereas candidates in group B (n=11) reported a pain score of 2.75-2.55. The mean recovery time was 2.8 days in group A and 8.23 days in group B (p<0.001). Conclusions Endoscopic adenoidectomy using micro-debrider is both an effective and safe adenoidectomy tool. The strengths of this technique include resection completeness, precise resection under vision, minor damage to collaterals, and a more rapid recovery period. Conventional adenoidectomy, however, scored better regarding lesser operative time and bleeding intraoperatively.