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.