TRANSORAL 'VIDEOENDOSCOPIC ADENOIDECTOMY WITH MICRODEBRIDER VERSUS CURETTAGE ADENOIDECTOMY
|Full paper||Not Available|
Adenoidectomy is one of the most common procedures performed in children today, either alone or in conjunction with tonsillectomy or insertion of ventilating tubes. The main disadvantage of curettage is that it is a relatively 'blind" technique that may lacerate the choanae and torus tubarius, gauge the nasopharyngeal mucosa, or skim the adenoid bulk, leaving behind obstructing tissue, particularly at the Eustachian tube orifices, high in the nasopharynx, and at infranasal protrusions. The powered-shaver method with microdebrider has been applied in a number of ways. It may be the primary technique, used as an adjunct to curettage, or coupled with other methods. Objectives: The aim of this work was to compare the advantage and disadvantage among transoral videoendoscopic adenoidectomy with microdebrider and traditional Transoral Curette Adenoidectomy. Patients and Methods: Two-hundred patients of both sexes were included in this study all had adenoid (with or without tonsils) hypertrophy. All patients were distributed in two groups. Group (A) ninety (90) patients were underwent transoral video endoscopic adenoidectomy with microdebrider. Group (B) One hundred and ten (110) patients were underwent traditional Transoral Curette Adenoidectomy. Direct comparisons between the Iwo groups were being made with regards to operative time, amount of blood loss , presence of possible residual lymphoid tissue, absence of bleeding.