Skip to main content

Powered turbinoplasty versus powered turbinectomy: a comparative study

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of powered turbinoplasty with those of powered turbinectomy.

Materials and methods

Forty patients suffering from hypertrophied inferior turbinate that resisted ordinary medical treatment were randomly divided into two equal groups. One group was managed with powered turbinoplasty and the other with powered turbinectomy. The patients were followed up for 6 weeks postoperatively.

Results

After 6 weeks the total success in reducing the size of the turbinate and postoperative blood clots was the same (100%) for both groups but it was 100% for powered turbinoplasty and 80% for powered turbinectomy in the occurrence of postoperative crustations.

Conclusion

Powered turbinoplasty is a promising surgical procedure for inferior turbinate surgery. This procedure achieves optimum turbinate reduction with less complications in patients with respect to bleeding, occurrence of crustations, blood clots, and nasal discharge postoperatively.

References

  1. 1

    Gottarelli P. Modified inferior turbinoplasty; Italy: Rhinoplasty Surgeon Bologna; 2012. 3–50.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Friedman M, Vidyasagar R. Surgical management of septal deformity, turbinate hypertrophy, nasal valve collapse and choanal atresia. In: Bailey BJ, Johnson JT, Newlands SD, editors. Head & neck surgery - otolaryngology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2006. 1: 328–330.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Hol MK, Huizing EH. Treatment of inferior turbinate pathology: a review and critical evaluation of the different techniques. Rhinology 2000; 38:157–166.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Setcliff RC, Parsons DS. The hummer: new instrumentation for functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Am J Rhinol 1994; 8:275–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Lee KC, Hwang PH, Kingdom TT. Surgical management of inferior turbinate hypertrophy in the office: three mucosal sparing techniques. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001; 12:107–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Wormald P-J. Endoscopic sinus surgery anatomy, three-dimensional reconstruction, and surgical technique 3rd ed. New York: Thieme Medical Publisher; 2013; 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Passali D, Passali FM, Damiani V, et al. Treatment of inferior turbinate hypertrophy: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2003; 112:683–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Wengraf CL, Gleeson MJ, Siodlak MZ. The stuffy nose: a comparative study of two common methods of treatment. Clin Otolaryngol 1986; 11:61–68.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Davis WE, Nishioka GJ. Endoscopic partial inferior turbinectomy using a power microcutting instrument. Ear Nose Throat J 1996; 75:49–50.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Friedman M, Tanyeri H, Lim J, et al. A safe, alternative technique for inferior turbinate reduction. Laryngoscope 1999; 109:1834–1837.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Mori S, Fujieda S, Yamada T, et al. Long-term effect of submucous turbinectomy in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Laryngoscope 2002; 112:865–869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Kassab AN, Rifaat M, Madian Y. Comparative study of management of inferior turbinate hypertrophy using turbinoplasty assisted by microdebrider or 980nm diode laser. J Laryngol Otol 2012; 126:1231–1237.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Joniau S, Wong I, Rajapaksa S, Carney SA, Wormald P-J. Long-term comparison between submucosal cauterization and powered reduction of the inferior turbinates Laryngoscope 2006; 116:1612–1616.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmed A. Kamel.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ibrahim, S.G., Kamel, A.A., El-Fouly, M.S. et al. Powered turbinoplasty versus powered turbinectomy: a comparative study. Egypt J Otolaryngol 33, 9–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4103/1012-5574.199402

Download citation

Keywords

  • nasal
  • obstruction
  • powered
  • turbinate
  • turbinectomy
  • turbinoplasty