{"title":"消融腺样体切除术与常规腺样体切除术:两种不同腺样体切除术技术的比较研究。","authors":"Dianitta-Devapriya Veronica, Prabaakharan Jambunathan","doi":"10.22038/ijorl.2025.84811.3855","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic nasal obstruction, frequent respiratory infections, recurrent ear blocks, earaches, and pediatric obstructive sleep apnea may indicate adenoid enlargement, one of the most common conditions encountered in pediatric otorhinolaryngology practice. Adenoidectomy is a simple procedure with certain limitations, which has led to various innovations in surgical techniques in the recent past. The study aimed to compare two different adenoidectomy techniques: the endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy and the conventional curettage adenoidectomy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective randomized interventional study involving 40 patients, 20 patients in Group A underwent curettage adenoidectomy, and 20 patients in Group B underwent endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy. Complete adenoid tissue removal, surgical blood loss, operative duration, postoperative pain, and recovery time are the outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy enabled complete adenoid removal better than conventional adenoidectomy, 15 patients (75%) had complete removal versus 3 patients (15%) in the conventional group (p-value of 0.0003). The mean blood loss was 30 ± 5.60 mL in Group A and 10.75 ± 2.93 mL in Group B (p = 0.0001). The pain score assessed using the visual analog scale was 4 ± 0.44 in Group A and 3 ± 0.36 in Group B (p = 0.0001). The mean time taken for recovery in Group A was 3.14 ± 0.62 days and that in Group B was 2.64 ± 0.64 days (p = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Coblation adenoidectomy under endoscopic guidance enabled complete adenoid removal, reduction in surgical blood loss and postoperative pain, and shortened recovery time.</p>","PeriodicalId":14607,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":"37 4","pages":"179-186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335664/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coblation Adenoidectomy Versus Conventional Adenoidectomy: A Comparative Study of two Different Techniques of Adenoidectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Dianitta-Devapriya Veronica, Prabaakharan Jambunathan\",\"doi\":\"10.22038/ijorl.2025.84811.3855\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic nasal obstruction, frequent respiratory infections, recurrent ear blocks, earaches, and pediatric obstructive sleep apnea may indicate adenoid enlargement, one of the most common conditions encountered in pediatric otorhinolaryngology practice. Adenoidectomy is a simple procedure with certain limitations, which has led to various innovations in surgical techniques in the recent past. The study aimed to compare two different adenoidectomy techniques: the endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy and the conventional curettage adenoidectomy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective randomized interventional study involving 40 patients, 20 patients in Group A underwent curettage adenoidectomy, and 20 patients in Group B underwent endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy. Complete adenoid tissue removal, surgical blood loss, operative duration, postoperative pain, and recovery time are the outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy enabled complete adenoid removal better than conventional adenoidectomy, 15 patients (75%) had complete removal versus 3 patients (15%) in the conventional group (p-value of 0.0003). The mean blood loss was 30 ± 5.60 mL in Group A and 10.75 ± 2.93 mL in Group B (p = 0.0001). The pain score assessed using the visual analog scale was 4 ± 0.44 in Group A and 3 ± 0.36 in Group B (p = 0.0001). The mean time taken for recovery in Group A was 3.14 ± 0.62 days and that in Group B was 2.64 ± 0.64 days (p = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Coblation adenoidectomy under endoscopic guidance enabled complete adenoid removal, reduction in surgical blood loss and postoperative pain, and shortened recovery time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"volume\":\"37 4\",\"pages\":\"179-186\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12335664/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22038/ijorl.2025.84811.3855\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/ijorl.2025.84811.3855","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
慢性鼻塞、频繁的呼吸道感染、复发性耳塞、耳痛和儿童阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停可能表明腺样体肿大,这是儿童耳鼻喉科实践中最常见的疾病之一。腺样体切除术是一种简单的手术,有一定的局限性,这导致了近年来手术技术的各种创新。本研究旨在比较两种不同的腺样体切除术技术:内窥镜辅助消融腺样体切除术和常规刮除腺样体切除术。材料与方法:本前瞻性随机介入研究共40例患者,A组20例患者行刮除性腺样体切除术,B组20例患者行内镜消融性腺样体切除术。腺样体组织完全切除、手术出血量、手术时间、术后疼痛和恢复时间是衡量结果的指标。结果:内镜辅助消融腺样体切除术比常规腺样体切除术能更好地完全切除腺样体,15例(75%)患者完全切除,而常规组3例(15%)患者完全切除(p值为0.0003)。A组平均出血量为30±5.60 mL, B组平均出血量为10.75±2.93 mL (p = 0.0001)。采用视觉模拟评分法评定A组疼痛评分为4±0.44分,B组为3±0.36分(p = 0.0001)。A组平均恢复时间为3.14±0.62 d, B组平均恢复时间为2.64±0.64 d (p = 0.001)。结论:内镜引导下消融腺样体切除术可完全切除腺样体,减少手术出血量和术后疼痛,缩短恢复时间。
Coblation Adenoidectomy Versus Conventional Adenoidectomy: A Comparative Study of two Different Techniques of Adenoidectomy.
Introduction: Chronic nasal obstruction, frequent respiratory infections, recurrent ear blocks, earaches, and pediatric obstructive sleep apnea may indicate adenoid enlargement, one of the most common conditions encountered in pediatric otorhinolaryngology practice. Adenoidectomy is a simple procedure with certain limitations, which has led to various innovations in surgical techniques in the recent past. The study aimed to compare two different adenoidectomy techniques: the endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy and the conventional curettage adenoidectomy.
Materials and methods: In this prospective randomized interventional study involving 40 patients, 20 patients in Group A underwent curettage adenoidectomy, and 20 patients in Group B underwent endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy. Complete adenoid tissue removal, surgical blood loss, operative duration, postoperative pain, and recovery time are the outcome measures.
Results: Endoscopy-assisted coblation adenoidectomy enabled complete adenoid removal better than conventional adenoidectomy, 15 patients (75%) had complete removal versus 3 patients (15%) in the conventional group (p-value of 0.0003). The mean blood loss was 30 ± 5.60 mL in Group A and 10.75 ± 2.93 mL in Group B (p = 0.0001). The pain score assessed using the visual analog scale was 4 ± 0.44 in Group A and 3 ± 0.36 in Group B (p = 0.0001). The mean time taken for recovery in Group A was 3.14 ± 0.62 days and that in Group B was 2.64 ± 0.64 days (p = 0.001).
Conclusions: Coblation adenoidectomy under endoscopic guidance enabled complete adenoid removal, reduction in surgical blood loss and postoperative pain, and shortened recovery time.