Skip to main content

The value of endoscopic examination at the end of conventional adenoidectomy

Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of the use of endoscopes after a conventional curettage adenoidectomy for detecting any residual adenoid tissue and to determine whether removing any residual, if present, affects the recurrence or not.

Patients and methods

Fifty patients were divided randomly into two equal groups. Group A underwent a conventional curettage adenoidectomy, followed by an endoscopic examination of the nasopharynx to detect and remove any residual adenoid tissue. Group B underwent a conventional curettage adenoidectomy only. Both groups were followed up for recurrence of symptomatic adenoid at fixed follow-up intervals at 10 days, 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively.

Results

There was a significant difference in the rate of adenoid recurrence between both groups 6 months postoperatively. Two (8%) patients in group A and nine (36%) patients in group B developed recurrence. The P value was statistically significant at 0.04.

Conclusion

Endoscopic examination after a conventional adenoidectomy is a safe and essential step for complete removal of the adenoid, thus reducing the recurrence rate.

References

  1. 1

    Gross C, Harrison S. Tonsils and adenoids pediatrics. Pediatr Rev 2000; 21:75–78.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Paulussen C, Claes J, Jorissen M. Adenoids and tonsils indications for surgery and immunological consequences of surgery. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 2000; 54:403–408.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Havas T, Lowinger D. Obstructive adenoid tissue: an indication for powered shaver adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002; 128:789–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Koltai P, Chan J, Younes A. Power-assisted adenoidectomy: total and partial resection. Laryngoscope 2002; 112:29–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Bross-Soriano D, Schimelmitz-Idi J, Arrieta-Gómez J. Endoscopic adenoidectomy; use or abuse of the technology?. Cir Cir 2004; 72: 15–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Cassano P, Gelardi M, Cassano M, Fiorella M, Fiorella R. Adenoid tissue rhinopharyngeal obstruction grading based on fiberendoscopic findings: a novel approach to therapeutic management. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2003; 67:1303–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Saedi B, Sadeghi M, Mojtahed M, Mahboubi H. Diagnostic efficacy of different methods in the assessment of adenoid hypertrophy. Am J Otolaryngol Head Neck Med Surg 2011; 32:147–151.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Emerick K, Cunningham M. Tubal tonsil hypertrophy: a cause of recurrent symptoms after adenoidectomy. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 132:153–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Elluru R, Johnson L, Myer C III. Electrocautery adenoidectomy compared with curettage and power-assisted methods. Laryngoscope 2002; 112: 23–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Ark N, Kurtaran H, Ugur K, Yilmaz T, Ozboduroglu A, Mutlu C. Comparison of adenoidectomy methods: examining with digital palpation vs. visualizing the placement of the curette. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010; 74: 649–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Discolo C, Younes A, Koltai P. Current techniques of adenoidectomy. Oper Tech Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001; 12:199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Regmi D, Mathur N, Bhattarai M. Rigid endoscopic evaluation of conventional curettage adenoidectomy. J Laryngol Otol 2011; 125:53–58.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Pagella F, Matti E, Colombo A, Giourgos G, Mira E. How we do it: a combined method of traditional curette and power-assisted endoscopic adenoidectomy. Acta Otolaryngol 2009; 129:556–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Saxby A, Chappel C. Residual adenoid tissue post-curettage: role of nasopharyngoscopy in adenoidectomy. ANZ J Surg 2009; 79:809–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmad M. Nassar.

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

Abdelhamid, M.A., Dewidar, H.M., Nassar, A.M. et al. The value of endoscopic examination at the end of conventional adenoidectomy. Egypt J Otolaryngol 33, 24–30 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4103/1012-5574.199417

Download citation

Keywords

  • adenoid
  • adenoid recurrence
  • endoscopic examination