Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T02:23:48.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative analysis of conventional cold curettage versus endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2019

R Bidaye ,
N Vaid  and
K Desarda
R Bidaye*
Affiliation:
ENT Department, KEM Hospital, Pune, India
N Vaid
Affiliation:
ENT Department, KEM Hospital, Pune, India
K Desarda
Affiliation:
ENT Department, KEM Hospital, Pune, India
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Rohan Bidaye, ENT Department, KEM Hospital, Rasta Peth, Pune 411011, India E-mail: dr.rohanbidaye@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To compare conventional cold curettage adenoidectomy with endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy in terms of operative time, primary blood loss, post-operative residual tissue and post-operative pain.

Methods

This prospective non-randomised study was carried out on 60 patients aged 5–12 years. One group underwent conventional cold curettage adenoidectomy and the other underwent endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy, with 30 patients per group.

Results

Mean operation duration was significantly higher for endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. Mean blood loss was 44.33 ml in conventional cold curettage adenoidectomy and 32.47 ml in endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. The pain grade was significantly lower in endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. Forty per cent of patients who underwent conventional cold curettage adenoidectomy had adenoid tissue post-surgery, while it was completely absent in endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy patients.

Conclusion

Coblation adenoidectomy has significant advantages over conventional adenoidectomy in terms of reduced blood loss, no post-operative residual tissue and lower pain grade on day 1 after surgery.

Keywords

AdenoidectomyCoblationCold CurettageAdenoidsPainBlood Loss
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 133 , Issue 4 , April 2019 , pp. 294 - 299
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr R Bidaye takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1Gallagher, TQ, Wilcox, L, McGuire, E, Derkay, CS. Analyzing factors associated with major complications after adenotonsillectomy in 4776 patients: comparing three tonsillectomy techniques. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2010;142:886–9210.1016/j.otohns.2010.02.019Google Scholar
2Regmi, D, Mathur, NN, Bhattarai, M. Rigid endoscopic evaluation of conventional curettage adenoidectomy. J Laryngol Otol 2011;125:53–8Google Scholar
3Glade, RS, Pearson, SE, Zalzal, GH. Coblation adenotonsillectomy: an improvement over electrocautery technique? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:852–510.1016/j.otohns.2005.11.005Google Scholar
4Timms, MS, Ghosh, S, Roper, A. Adenoidectomy with the coblator: a logical extension of radiofrequency tonsillectomy. J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:398–9Google Scholar
5Krajewski, M, Samoliaski, B, Schmidt, J. Endoscopic adenotomy – clinical assessment of value and safety – an own experience [in Polish]. Otolaryngol Pol 2007;61:21–4Google Scholar
6Songu, M, Altay, C, Adibelli, ZH, Adibelli, H. Endoscopic assisted versus curettage adenoidectomy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study with objective outcome measures. Laryngoscope 2010;120:1895–9Google Scholar
7Di Rienzo Businco, L, Coen Tirelli, G. Paediatric tonsillectomy: radiofrequency-based plasma dissection compared to cold dissection with sutures. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2008;28:67–72Google Scholar
8Di Rienzo Businco, L, Di Rienzo Businco, A, Lauriello, M. Comparative study on the effectiveness of coblation assisted turbinoplasty in allergic rhinitis. Rhinology 2010;48:174–8Google Scholar
9Stoker, KE, Don, DM, Kang, DR, Haupert, MS, Magit, A, Madgy, DN. Pediatric total tonsillectomy using coblation compared to conventional electrosurgery: a prospective, controlled, single-blind study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:666–75Google Scholar
10Chang, KW. Randomized controlled trial of coblation versus electrocautery tonsillectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;132:273–80Google Scholar
11Chan, KH, Friedman, NR, Allen, GC, Yaremchuk, K, Wirtschafter, A, Bikhazi, N et al. Randomized, controlled, multisite study of intracapsular tonsillectomy using low-temperature plasma excision. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:1303–7Google Scholar
12Parsons, SP, Cordes, SR, Comer, B. Comparison of post-tonsillectomy pain using the ultrasonic scalpel, coblator, and electrocautery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:106–1310.1016/j.otohns.2005.09.027Google Scholar
13Tarantino, V, D'Agostino, R, Melagrana, A, Porcu, A, Stura, M, Vallarino, R. Safety of electronic molecular resonance adenoidectomy. Int J Pediatr Otolaryngol 2004;68:1519–2310.1016/j.ijporl.2004.07.013Google Scholar
14Murray, N, Fitzpatrick, P, Guarisco, JL. Powered partial adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:792–610.1001/archotol.128.7.792Google Scholar
15Koltai, PJ, Kalathia, AS, Stanislaw, P, Heras, HA. Power-assisted adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;123:685–8Google Scholar
16Owens, D, Jaramillo, M, Saunders, M. Suction diathermy adenoid ablation. J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:34–5Google Scholar
17Wong, L, Moxham, JP, Ludemann, JP. Electrosurgical adenoid ablation. J Otolaryngol 2004;33:104–610.2310/7070.2004.00104Google Scholar
18Havas, T, Lowinger, D. Obstructive adenoid tissue: an indication for powered-shaver adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:789–91Google Scholar
19Giannoni, C, Sulek, M, Friedman, EM, Duncan, NO. Acquired nasopharyngeal stenosis: a warning and review. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;124:163–7Google Scholar
20Shehata, EM, Ragab, SM, Behiry, AB, Erfan, FH, Gamea, AM. Telescopic-assisted radiofrequency adenoidectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Laryngoscope 2005;115:162–610.1097/01.mlg.0000150704.13204.20Google Scholar
21Setliff, RC 3rd. The hummer: a remedy for apprehension in functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1996;29:95–104Google Scholar
22Yanagisawa, E, Weaver, E. Endoscopic adenoidectomy with the microdebrider. Ear Nose Throat J 1997;76:72–4Google Scholar
23Stanislaw, P, Koltai, PJ, Feustel, PJ. Comparison of power-assisted adenoidectomy vs adenoid curette adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;126:845–9Google Scholar
24Cannon, CR, Replogle, WH, Schenk, MP. Endoscopic-assisted adenoidectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;121:740–4Google Scholar
25Woloszko, J, Stalder, KR, Brown, IG. Plasma characteristics of repetitively-pulsed electrical discharges in saline solutions used for surgical procedures. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci IEEE Nucl Plasma Sci Soc 2002;30:1376–83Google Scholar
26Stalder, KR, Woloszko, J, Brown, IG, Smith, CD. Repetitive plasma discharges in saline solutions. Appl Phys Lett 2001;79:4503–5Google Scholar
27Heppard, IJ, Moir, AA, Thomas, RSA, Narula, AA. Organization of day-case adenoidectomy in the management of chronic otitis media with effusion – preliminary results. J R Soc Med 1993;86:76–8Google Scholar
28Marshall, JN, Sheppard, I, Narula, AA. A prospective study of day case adenoidectomy. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1995;20:164–6Google Scholar
29Siddiqui, N, Yung, MW. Day-case adenoidectomy: how popular and safe in a rural environment? J Laryngol Otol 1997;111:444–6Google Scholar
30Kokki, H, Ahonen, R. Pain and activity disturbance after pediatric day case adenoidectomy. Paediatr Anaesth 1997;7:227–31Google Scholar
31Kotiniemi, LH, Rhyanen, PT, Mollanen, IK. Behavioural changes in children following day-case surgery: a 4-week follow-up of 551 children. Anaesthesia 1997;52:970–6Google Scholar