International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2008
Revision adenoidectomy--a retrospective study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Monroy Angelo, Behar Philomena, Brodsky Linda
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Adenoid "re-growth" is a poorly understood phenomenon. While parents often express concerns regarding the potential for adenoid "re-growth", little information exists in the literature about its incidence and causation.
PURPOSE: To establish the incidence and possible contributing factors leading to adenoid re-growth in children.
DESIGN: Retrospective case series review.
SETTING: Tertiary care children's hospital.
METHODS: The charts of 106 patients who underwent revision adenoidectomy between 1995 and 2006 were reviewed. Thirty-four patients were excluded because the primary adenoidectomy was performed elsewhere or initially only a partial adenoidectomy was performed. In the remaining 72 patients, demographic data, clinical presentation, associated medical conditions and findings at surgery were studied.
RESULTS: During the 11-year study period. 13,005 adenoidectomies or adenotonsillectomies were performed; 72/13,005 (0.55%) underwent revision adenoidectomy. The mean (+/-S.D.) age at presentation for primary adenoidectomy was 3.68+/-2.9 and 7.69+/-4.04 years for secondary ("revision") adenoidectomy with an average time interval of 4.3 years between surgeries. Age at initial adenoidectomy was not a significant factor in predicting revision adenoid surgery. 29/72 (40%) underwent a reflux work up including scintiscan with gastric emptying, 24h pH probe, or laryngoscopy. 28/29 (96%) were diagnosed with reflux. At least 15/72 (21%) were reported to have symptoms consistent with adenoid re-growth which were found to be caused by tubal tonsil hyperplasia.
CONCLUSIONS: Revision adenoidectomy rarely needs to be performed. Tubal tonsillar hyperplasia, as opposed to re-growth of residual adenoid tissue previously removed, accounts for some cases. Extraesophageal reflux is a possible cause in some and requires further study.
PURPOSE: To establish the incidence and possible contributing factors leading to adenoid re-growth in children.
DESIGN: Retrospective case series review.
SETTING: Tertiary care children's hospital.
METHODS: The charts of 106 patients who underwent revision adenoidectomy between 1995 and 2006 were reviewed. Thirty-four patients were excluded because the primary adenoidectomy was performed elsewhere or initially only a partial adenoidectomy was performed. In the remaining 72 patients, demographic data, clinical presentation, associated medical conditions and findings at surgery were studied.
RESULTS: During the 11-year study period. 13,005 adenoidectomies or adenotonsillectomies were performed; 72/13,005 (0.55%) underwent revision adenoidectomy. The mean (+/-S.D.) age at presentation for primary adenoidectomy was 3.68+/-2.9 and 7.69+/-4.04 years for secondary ("revision") adenoidectomy with an average time interval of 4.3 years between surgeries. Age at initial adenoidectomy was not a significant factor in predicting revision adenoid surgery. 29/72 (40%) underwent a reflux work up including scintiscan with gastric emptying, 24h pH probe, or laryngoscopy. 28/29 (96%) were diagnosed with reflux. At least 15/72 (21%) were reported to have symptoms consistent with adenoid re-growth which were found to be caused by tubal tonsil hyperplasia.
CONCLUSIONS: Revision adenoidectomy rarely needs to be performed. Tubal tonsillar hyperplasia, as opposed to re-growth of residual adenoid tissue previously removed, accounts for some cases. Extraesophageal reflux is a possible cause in some and requires further study.