Vasudha Singh, Baruah Binayak
Department of ENT, Tata Main Hospital & Manipal Tata Medical College, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand India.
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Oct;76(5):4019-4024. doi: 10.1007/s12070-024-04769-7. Epub 2024 May 31.
The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of Endoscopic Adenoidectomy with Microdebrider over Conventional technique by Curettage using Impedance Audiometry findings. In this prospective, randomised, comparative study patients were divided into two groups to undergo one of the above adenoidectomy surgeries. Patients with symptoms of Adenoid hypertrophy after failed maximal medical therapy (12 weeks) were selected after due consideration of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Baseline Impedance Audiometric assessment was done one week prior to surgery which was compared to Impedance Audiometric values 12 weeks post operatively in each group. This study enrolled 50 patients with adenoid hypertrophy, 25 patients of group A underwent Conventional adenoidectomy and the other 25 patients of group B underwent Endoscopic Adenoidectomy with Microdebrider. Significant difference in type of tympanogram before and after adenoidectomy was found in both the groups ( = 0.0008 in group A & < 0.0001 in group B). In Group A Percentage of abnormal tympanograms becoming normal (Type A), 12 weeks after adenoidectomy was 80%. In Group B Percentage of abnormal tympanograms becoming normal (Type A), 12 weeks after adenoidectomy was 88%. A statistically significant improvement ( < 0.0001 in both the groups) in the percentage of ears with absent stapedial reflex was observed in both groups postoperatively, with no difference between the two groups suggestive of improvement in eustachian tube function. Association of Preoperatively & Postoperatively Eustachian tube function in each group undergoing adenoidectomy was statistically significant ( < 0.0001). Both forms of adenoidectomy are effective in managing adenoid hypertrophy with tubal dysfunction causing mild conductive hearing loss and prone for OME. However, the audiological and endoscopic evaluation seems to favor Endoscopic Adenoidectomy with microdebrider over conventional adenoidectomy, and it should be therefore considered in the therapeutic management of young patients with adenoidal disease.
本研究的目的是通过阻抗测听结果评估和比较使用微型切割器的内镜下腺样体切除术与传统刮除术的疗效。在这项前瞻性、随机、对照研究中,患者被分为两组,分别接受上述一种腺样体切除手术。在充分考虑纳入和排除标准后,选择经过最大程度药物治疗(12周)失败后出现腺样体肥大症状的患者。术前一周进行基线阻抗测听评估,并与每组术后12周的阻抗测听值进行比较。本研究纳入了50例腺样体肥大患者,A组25例患者接受传统腺样体切除术,B组另外25例患者接受使用微型切割器的内镜下腺样体切除术。两组腺样体切除术前和术后鼓室图类型均存在显著差异(A组P = 0.0008,B组P < 0.0001)。A组腺样体切除术后12周异常鼓室图变为正常(A型)的百分比为80%。B组腺样体切除术后12周异常鼓室图变为正常(A型)的百分比为88%。两组术后镫骨肌反射消失的耳朵百分比均有统计学显著改善(两组P均< 0.0001),两组之间无差异,提示咽鼓管功能改善。每组接受腺样体切除术的患者术前和术后咽鼓管功能的相关性具有统计学意义(P < 0.0001)。两种形式的腺样体切除术在治疗腺样体肥大伴咽鼓管功能障碍导致轻度传导性听力损失且易患中耳炎方面均有效。然而,听力学和内镜评估似乎更倾向于使用微型切割器的内镜下腺样体切除术而非传统腺样体切除术,因此在腺样体疾病年轻患者的治疗管理中应予以考虑。