Atisha T Modi, Jayman B Raval, R G Aiyer, Purva C Shah
{"title":"常规刮除腺样体切除术与内镜微创腺样体辅助切除术的比较研究:我们的经验。","authors":"Atisha T Modi, Jayman B Raval, R G Aiyer, Purva C Shah","doi":"10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adenoidectomy is one of the commonest surgical procedures performed by otolaryngologists however; its recurrence rates are very high. Our objective in this study was to compare safety and efficacy between conventional curettage and endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy. This was a prospective comparative parallel randomized control trial conducted at a tertiary care hospital from April 2017 to December 2018. We divided patients (N = 42) into two groups i.e. conventional adenoidectomy (group A) (n<sub>1</sub> = 21) and endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy (group B) (n<sub>1</sub> = 21) groups using the lottery method of randomization. Among 42 patients, 33 (79%) were male and 9 (21%) were female. The average operative time in group A was 16.15 min and in group B was 22.9 min with <i>p</i> value < 0.05. Average blood loss in group A was 35.57 ml and in group B was 37.14 ml. In group A, 1 (4.76%) of 21 patients developed temporary velopharyngeal insufficiency which was relieved after 4 weeks of surgery whereas in group B, 5 (23.8%) patients developed nasal bleed and 2 (9.52%) patients presented with nasal synechiae on follow-up. Eight (38%) patients in group A showed grade I adenoids after 3 weeks of surgery while group B showed complete clearance in all patients (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Conventional adenoidectomy has less intra-operative blood loss and shorter surgical time duration as compared to endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy but with higher chances of residual adenoid tissue.</p>","PeriodicalId":49190,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"875-880"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Study Between Conventional Curettage Adenoidectomy Versus Endoscopic Microdebrider Assisted Adenoidectomy: Our Experience.\",\"authors\":\"Atisha T Modi, Jayman B Raval, R G Aiyer, Purva C Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Adenoidectomy is one of the commonest surgical procedures performed by otolaryngologists however; its recurrence rates are very high. Our objective in this study was to compare safety and efficacy between conventional curettage and endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy. This was a prospective comparative parallel randomized control trial conducted at a tertiary care hospital from April 2017 to December 2018. We divided patients (N = 42) into two groups i.e. conventional adenoidectomy (group A) (n<sub>1</sub> = 21) and endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy (group B) (n<sub>1</sub> = 21) groups using the lottery method of randomization. Among 42 patients, 33 (79%) were male and 9 (21%) were female. The average operative time in group A was 16.15 min and in group B was 22.9 min with <i>p</i> value < 0.05. Average blood loss in group A was 35.57 ml and in group B was 37.14 ml. In group A, 1 (4.76%) of 21 patients developed temporary velopharyngeal insufficiency which was relieved after 4 weeks of surgery whereas in group B, 5 (23.8%) patients developed nasal bleed and 2 (9.52%) patients presented with nasal synechiae on follow-up. Eight (38%) patients in group A showed grade I adenoids after 3 weeks of surgery while group B showed complete clearance in all patients (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Conventional adenoidectomy has less intra-operative blood loss and shorter surgical time duration as compared to endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy but with higher chances of residual adenoid tissue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"875-880\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/7/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01944-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
腺样体切除术是耳鼻喉科医生进行的最常见的外科手术之一;其复发率非常高。我们在这项研究中的目的是比较传统刮宫术和内窥镜辅助显微腺样体切除术的安全性和有效性。这是一项前瞻性比较平行随机对照试验,于2017年4月至2018年12月在一家三级护理医院进行。我们将患者(N = 42)分为两组,即常规腺样体切除术(A组)(n1 = 21)和内窥镜微创辅助腺样体切除术(B组)(n1 = 21)组。42例患者中,33例(79%)为男性,9例(21%)为女性。A组平均手术时间为16.15分钟,B组为22.9分钟,p值 p
Comparative Study Between Conventional Curettage Adenoidectomy Versus Endoscopic Microdebrider Assisted Adenoidectomy: Our Experience.
Adenoidectomy is one of the commonest surgical procedures performed by otolaryngologists however; its recurrence rates are very high. Our objective in this study was to compare safety and efficacy between conventional curettage and endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy. This was a prospective comparative parallel randomized control trial conducted at a tertiary care hospital from April 2017 to December 2018. We divided patients (N = 42) into two groups i.e. conventional adenoidectomy (group A) (n1 = 21) and endoscopic microdebrider assisted adenoidectomy (group B) (n1 = 21) groups using the lottery method of randomization. Among 42 patients, 33 (79%) were male and 9 (21%) were female. The average operative time in group A was 16.15 min and in group B was 22.9 min with p value < 0.05. Average blood loss in group A was 35.57 ml and in group B was 37.14 ml. In group A, 1 (4.76%) of 21 patients developed temporary velopharyngeal insufficiency which was relieved after 4 weeks of surgery whereas in group B, 5 (23.8%) patients developed nasal bleed and 2 (9.52%) patients presented with nasal synechiae on follow-up. Eight (38%) patients in group A showed grade I adenoids after 3 weeks of surgery while group B showed complete clearance in all patients (p < 0.05). Conventional adenoidectomy has less intra-operative blood loss and shorter surgical time duration as compared to endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy but with higher chances of residual adenoid tissue.
期刊介绍:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery was founded as Indian Journal of Otolaryngology in 1949 as a scientific Journal published by the Association of Otolaryngologists of India and was later rechristened as IJOHNS to incorporate the changes and progress.
IJOHNS, undoubtedly one of the oldest Journals in India, is the official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India and is about to publish it is 67th Volume in 2015. The Journal published quarterly accepts articles in general Oto-Rhino-Laryngology and various subspecialities such as Otology, Rhinology, Laryngology and Phonosurgery, Neurotology, Head and Neck Surgery etc.
The Journal acts as a window to showcase and project the clinical and research work done by Otolaryngologists community in India and around the world. It is a continued source of useful clinical information with peer review by eminent Otolaryngologists of repute in their respective fields. The Journal accepts articles pertaining to clinical reports, Clinical studies, Research articles in basic and applied Otolaryngology, short Communications, Clinical records reporting unusual presentations or lesions and new surgical techniques. The journal acts as a catalyst and mirrors the Indian Otolaryngologist’s active interests and pursuits. The Journal also invites articles from senior and experienced authors on interesting topics in Otolaryngology and allied sciences from all over the world.
The print version is distributed free to about 4000 members of Association of Otolaryngologists of India and the e-Journal shortly going to make its appearance on the Springer Board can be accessed by all the members.
Association of Otolaryngologists of India and M/s Springer India group have come together to co-publish IJOHNS from January 2007 and this bondage is going to provide an impetus to the Journal in terms of international presence and global exposure.