Coblation versus suction Diathermy in Endoscopic Pediatric Adenoidectomy: Randomized clinical trial

IF 1.1 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-24 DOI:10.1016/j.otorri.2025.512287

Abobakr Mohammed Elbakry , Ahmed Nabil Selim , Alaa Abdelwahab Eldarawy , Abdallah Mahmoud Gad

{"title":"Coblation versus suction Diathermy in Endoscopic Pediatric Adenoidectomy: Randomized clinical trial","authors":"Abobakr Mohammed Elbakry , Ahmed Nabil Selim , Alaa Abdelwahab Eldarawy , Abdallah Mahmoud Gad","doi":"10.1016/j.otorri.2025.512287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aim of the study is comparing endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy and suction diathermy in terms of surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications such as foul odor, neck pain, and secondary bleeding, as well as patient recovery.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><div>Prospective randomized double blinded controlled trial involving 210 patients who presented with adenoid hypertrophy. Randomization was done in two groups group A including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by suction diathermy, Group B including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by coblation technique.</div><div>Patients were compared regarding intraoperative blood loss and operative time and postoperative bleeding, postoperative neck pain, and halitosis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>When comparing the two groups, Group B had notably longer surgeries but experienced less pain after the operation, recovered more quickly, and had a lower chance of bad breath. There was no significant difference between both the groups regarding intraoperative blood loss.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both techniques are effective in management of adenoid hypertrophy, but results showed endoscopic adenoidectomy with coblation is favored over suction diathermy due to better postoperative outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7019,"journal":{"name":"Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola","volume":"77 1","pages":"Article 512287"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001651925000925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of the study is comparing endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy and suction diathermy in terms of surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications such as foul odor, neck pain, and secondary bleeding, as well as patient recovery.

Patients and methods

Prospective randomized double blinded controlled trial involving 210 patients who presented with adenoid hypertrophy. Randomization was done in two groups group A including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by suction diathermy, Group B including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by coblation technique.

Patients were compared regarding intraoperative blood loss and operative time and postoperative bleeding, postoperative neck pain, and halitosis.

Results

When comparing the two groups, Group B had notably longer surgeries but experienced less pain after the operation, recovered more quickly, and had a lower chance of bad breath. There was no significant difference between both the groups regarding intraoperative blood loss.

Conclusion

Both techniques are effective in management of adenoid hypertrophy, but results showed endoscopic adenoidectomy with coblation is favored over suction diathermy due to better postoperative outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

内镜下小儿腺样体切除术中消融与吸吸透热：随机临床试验

本研究的目的是比较内镜下消融腺样体切除术和抽吸透热术在手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症（如恶臭、颈部疼痛和继发性出血）以及患者恢复方面的差异。患者和方法前瞻性随机双盲对照试验纳入210例腺样体肥大患者。随机分为两组，A组105例采用吸热法进行内窥镜腺样体切除术，B组105例采用消融法进行内窥镜腺样体切除术。比较患者术中出血量、手术时间、术后出血、术后颈部疼痛和口臭。结果两组比较，B组手术时间较长，术后疼痛较少，恢复较快，口臭发生率较低。两组术中出血量差异无统计学意义。结论两种技术均可有效治疗腺样体肥大，但结果显示，内镜下腺样体切除合并消融术比吸力热疗术效果更好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

20.00%

发文量

审稿时长

44 days

期刊介绍： Es la revista más importante en español dedicada a la especialidad. Ofrece progresos científicos y técnicos tanto a nivel de originales como de casos clínicos. Además, es la Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Patología Cérvico-Facial y está presente en los más prestigiosos índices de referencia.