Article Type
Article
Abstract
Objective
To compare between endoscopic coblation versus cold curettage adenoidectomy regarding operative time, blood loss, postoperative pain, and complications.
Patients and methods
This systematic review was performed in accordance to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses statement. An electronic search was conducted from 1998 till 2019 using the different keywords (curettage–coblation techniques of adenoidectomy) through the MEDLINE databases.
Results
The search retrieved 163 unique records. We then retained 49 potentially eligible records for screening. Finally, 14 studies were included in the present work. Concerning the operative time, the overall effect estimates favored curettage over coblation [95% confidence interval (CI) −11.1 to −4.41; P = 0.001). A smaller amount of blood loss was noted in coblation group (95% CI −14.29 to −15.76; P = 0.23). The postoperative pain was less with coblation (95% CI −0.07 to −4.75; P = 0.04). One study directly compared the recurrence rate in the two groups. It favored coblation over curettage for reduction of recurrence rate.
Conclusion
Endoscopic coblation is superior to curettage adenoidectomy regarding the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain. However, special attention should be paid for operation time with endoscopic coblation. Nevertheless, further studies are still needed to confirm our findings.
Keywords:
cold curettage adenoidectomy, endoscopic coblation, techniques of adenoidectomy.
Recommended Citation
Aleem M, Rabie AN, Ibrahim AF,
et al.
Endoscopic coblation versus cold curettage adenoidectomy.
Pan Arab J. Rhinol.
2021;
11 : 26-36.
Available at:
https://pajr.researchcommons.org/journal/vol11/iss1/5
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/pajr.pajr_20_20
