You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 128 No. 7, July 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (1)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal

Powered Partial Adenoidectomy

Nicole Murray, MD; Philip Fitzpatrick, MD; J. Lindhe Guarisco, MD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;128:792-796.

Objective  To confirm our clinical impression that the powered microdebrider is superior to curettes for performing partial adenoidectomy (removal of the superior one half to three fourths of the adenoid pad).

Design  Observational study of 100 children undergoing partial adenoidectomy with the powered microdebrider compared with 40 children undergoing conventional partial adenoidectomy with curettes.

Setting  Private and public tertiary care centers.

Patients  All patients younger than 20 years undergoing partial adenoidectomy at the respective institutions during the study period.

Interventions  Partial adenoidectomy as indicated for chronic otitis media, airway obstruction, or chronic or recurrent tonsillitis with either the powered microdebrider or curettes.

Main Outcomes Measures  Operative time (with specific quantification of the time required for tissue removal and hemostasis), blood loss, complications, and subjective ease of use.

Results  Operative time was 59% shorter for the microdebrider group (mean, 3 minutes 22 seconds; range, 1 minute 6 seconds to 12 minutes 45 seconds) than for the conventional group (mean, 8 minutes 8 seconds; range, 1 minute 2 seconds to 22 minutes 0 seconds) (P<.001). Blood loss was comparable for both groups (powered group: mean, 2.0 mL/kg; range, 0.4 to 9.4 mL/kg; conventional group: mean, 2.0 mL/kg; range, 0.3 to 6.7 mL/kg; P=.34). There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications in either group. Surgeon satisfaction with the microdebrider was high.

Conclusions  The powered microdebrider for partial adenoidectomy is quicker and is not associated with blood loss or complications above that of conventional partial adenoidectomy. The degree of control afforded by the microdebrider technique is of utmost value in preventing complications such as velopharyngeal insufficiency, and this is now our procedure of choice.


From the Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ochsner Clinic and Alton Ochsner Medical Foundation, New Orleans, La. Dr Guarisco was a stockholder of Medtronic Xomed.



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Postoperative Recovery After Microdebrider Intracapsular or Monopolar Electrocautery Tonsillectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-blinded Study.
Sobol et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;132:270-274.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2002 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.