Comparison between Endoscopic Microdebrider Adenoidectomy and Conventional Curettage Method

Abstract

Background: Adenoidectomy is a surgical removal of hypertrophic nasopharyngeal lymphoid tissue forming a part of the Waldeyer's ring. Adenoid hypertrophy causes nasal obstruction and airway problems such as snoring, obstructive sleep apnea, recurrent sinusitis, and/or Eustachian tube dysfunction. These complications frequently lead to a need for adenoidectomy. Objective: To compare between cold curettage and endoscopic assisted powered technique as regard operative time, blood loss, postoperative complications. Patients and Methods: This prospective study included 18 patients, both genders, all suffering from hypertrophied adenoid tissue, presented clinically with mouth breathing, snoring, bilateral nasal obstruction and/or discharge and evidenced radiologically with plain X-ray film lateral view to the nasopharynx. All cases presented to ENT Department Zagazag University, during the period from July 2019 to July 2021, seeking for management of their problem. Patients were divided into two groups (9 patients each); Group I: In which patients were undergone conventional adenoidectomy with adenoid curette. Group II: Patients were undergone endoscopic assisted powered adenoidectomy. Results: Conventional curettage method of adenoidectomy group was associated with more operative bleeding than endoscopic assisted powered adenoidectomy group, but there was no significant difference. Nasal packing of conventional curettage method of adenoidectomy group was distributed as following; one patient (11.1%) required mild packing, 3 patients (33.3%) required moderate packing. While in endoscopic assisted powered adenoidectomy group, one (11.1%) required moderate packing. Conclusions: Endoscope assisted powered adenoidectomy needs to be acknowledged as a safe alternative to conventional adenoidectomy.