Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola · 2025
Coblation versus suction Diathermy in Endoscopic Pediatric Adenoidectomy: Randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Elbakry Abobakr Mohammed, Selim Ahmed Nabil, Eldarawy Alaa Abdelwahab, Gad Abdallah Mahmoud
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is comparing endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy and suction diathermy in terms of surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications such as foul odor, neck pain, and secondary bleeding, as well as patient recovery.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomized double blinded controlled trial involving 210 patients who presented with adenoid hypertrophy. Randomization was done in two groups group A including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by suction diathermy, Group B including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by coblation technique. Patients were compared regarding intraoperative blood loss and operative time and postoperative bleeding, postoperative neck pain, and halitosis.
RESULTS: When comparing the two groups, Group B had notably longer surgeries but experienced less pain after the operation, recovered more quickly, and had a lower chance of bad breath. There was no significant difference between both the groups regarding intraoperative blood loss.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques are effective in management of adenoid hypertrophy, but results showed endoscopic adenoidectomy with coblation is favored over suction diathermy due to better postoperative outcomes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective randomized double blinded controlled trial involving 210 patients who presented with adenoid hypertrophy. Randomization was done in two groups group A including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by suction diathermy, Group B including 105 patients who underwent endoscopic adenoidectomy by coblation technique. Patients were compared regarding intraoperative blood loss and operative time and postoperative bleeding, postoperative neck pain, and halitosis.
RESULTS: When comparing the two groups, Group B had notably longer surgeries but experienced less pain after the operation, recovered more quickly, and had a lower chance of bad breath. There was no significant difference between both the groups regarding intraoperative blood loss.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques are effective in management of adenoid hypertrophy, but results showed endoscopic adenoidectomy with coblation is favored over suction diathermy due to better postoperative outcomes.