Comparative Evaluation of Adenoidectomy Techniques in Pediatric Patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54361/LJMR.20.1.32Keywords:
Adenoidectomy, Microdebrider, Suction Diathermy, Conventional technique, Pediatric surgeryAbstract
Background: Adenoidectomy is a common pediatric procedure removing enlarged nasopharyngeal tissue, preventing airway obstruction and complications like facial deformities and pulmonary hypertension.Aim: To compare the outcomes of adenoidectomy using three surgical techniques (three studied groups) (Conventional, Microdebrider, and Suction Diathermy) to determine which method is most effective and safest.materials and methods: This was a prospective randomized comparative investigation including 75 pediatric cases scheduled for adenoidectomy. Cases were randomly assigned into three equal groups (25 patients each) based on the surgical method: Group A: Conventional curette adenoidectomy, group B: Microdebrider-assisted adenoidectomy, and group C: Suction diathermy adenoidectomy. Results: The Microdebrider and Suction Diathermy techniques both achieved 100% excellent outcomes, compared to only 24% with the Conventional technique, with a statistically significant variance (P ≤ 0.001). The Conventional technique illustrated 52% fair results and no excellent or good outcomes, unlike the modern techniques. Operative time was shortest with the Conventional technique (9.8 min) (P ≤ 0.001). Hospitalization was similar across groups (~7 hours, P = 0.85). Blood loss was lowest in Suction Diathermy (6.12 ml) than Microdebrider and Conventional (P ≤ 0.001). Mucosal lacerations on the vomer and torus tubarius occurred only in the Conventional group (12% and 16%, respectively), with none reported in the Microdebrider or Suction Diathermy groups (P = 0.003). Conclusion: Suction Diathermy Technique offers safe, effective removal with minimal bleeding, while Microdebrider Technique has longer operative time and Conventional Technique has more complications and lower success.
Downloads
References
1. Wong BY, Chan CP. Adenoidectomy. Operative Techniques in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. 2021 Mar 1;32(1):15-9.
2. Pereira L, Monyror J, Almeida FT, Almeida FR, Guerra E, Flores-Mir C, Pachêco-Pereira C. Prevalence of adenoid hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev. 2018 Apr;38:101-112. doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2017.06.001. Epub 2017 Jun 14. PMID: 29153763.
3. Abo Elmagd EA, Khalifa MS, Abeskharoon BK, El Tahan AA. Comparative study between conventional adenoidectomy and adenoidectomy using micro-debrider. The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology. 2021 Dec;37(1):56.
4. Yıldırım U, Kemal Ö, Kavaz E, Atmaca S, Koyuncu M. A rare cause of acute severe upper airway obstruction that required endotracheal intubation: adenoid hypertrophy. Turk Pediatri Ars. 2020 Jun 19;55(2):199-202. doi: 10.14744/TurkPediatriArs.2018.89156. PMID: 32684767; PMCID: PMC7344138.
5. Seleim AM, Elsamnody AN, Amer AF. Different techniques of adenoidectomy and its impact on middle ear pressure: a randomized controlled study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024 Jan;281(1):379-385. doi: 10.1007/s00405-023-08188-2. Epub 2023 Nov 6. PMID: 37930385; PMCID: PMC10764527.
6. McClay JE, Meyers AD. Adenoidectomy treatment & management [Medscape].
7. Thornval A. Wilhelm Meyer and the adenoids. Arch Otolaryngol. 1969 Sep;90(3):383-6. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1969.00770030385023. PMID: 4896109.
8. Ruben RJ. The adenoid: Its history and a cautionary tale. Laryngoscope. 2017 Jun;127 Suppl 2:S13-S28. doi: 10.1002/lary.26634. PMID: 28543437.
9. Koltai PJ, Kalathia AS, Stanislaw P, Heras HA. Power-assisted adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Jul;123(7):685-8. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1997.01900070023004. PMID: 9236585.
10. Pagella F, Pusateri A, Giourgos G, Matti E. Evolution of the adenoidectomy in the endoscopic era. Advances in Endoscopic Surgery. 2011 Nov 25:131-55.
11. Hartley BE, Papsin BC, Albert DM. Suction diathermy adenoidectomy. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1998 Aug;23(4):308-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.1998.00148.x. PMID: 9762491.
12. Wynn R, Rosenfeld RM. Outcomes in suction coagulator adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003 Feb;129(2):182-5. doi: 10.1001/archotol.129.2.182. PMID: 12578446.
13. Abdullah El-Maraghy A, Salah El-Din El-Habashy H, Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed H. Adenoidectomy by different techniques (comparative study). Al-Azhar Medical Journal. 2018 Oct 1;47(4):699-710.
14. Darwish MA, Elsherif AM, Elawamry MI. Comparative Study for Adenoidectomy by Different Surgical Methods. Al-Azhar International Medical Journal. 2024;5(11):33.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yazeeed Omar alahwel (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR).is an open journal, therefore there are no fees required for downloading any publication from the journal website by authors, readers, and institution.
The journal applies the license of CC BY (a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license). This license allows authors to keep ownership f the copyright of their papers. But this license permits any user to download , print out, extract, reuse, archive, and distribute the article, so long as appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source of the work.
The license ensures that the article will be available as widely as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific archive.
Editorial Policy
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR). It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editorial, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal must not be under consideration by any other journal. In general, the manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, although it may have been deposited on a preprint server. Authors are required to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Authorship Policy
The manuscript authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution and intellectual input to the research submitted to the journal, including design, performance, interpretation of the reported study, and writing the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the manuscript but without intellectual input should only be recognized in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Also, one of the authors should be selected as the corresponding author to communicate with the journal and approve the final version of the manuscript for publication in the LJMR.
Peer-review Policy
- All the manuscripts submitted to LJMR will be subjected to the double-blinded peer-review process;
- The manuscript will be reviewed by two suitable experts in the respective subject area.
- Reports of all the reviewers will be considered while deciding on acceptance/revision or rejection of a manuscript.
- Editor-In-Chief will make the final decision, based on the reviewer’s comments.
- Editor-In-Chief can ask one or more advisory board members for their suggestions upon a manuscript, before making the final decision.
- Associate editor and review editors provide administrative support to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.
- In case, authors challenge the editor’s negative decision with suitable arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one more reviewer and the final decision will be made based upon his recommendations.
https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2413-6069
