A Comparative Study of Endoscopic Coblation Adenoidectomy and Regular Curettage Adenoidectomy in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Kerala

Author(s): Abdul Salam R. T.1, Shahul Hameed A.2, Meera Rajan3

An ideal surgery to remove hypertrophied adenoid mass should be safe, with less
bleeding and operation time along with post-operative improvement in the
eustachian tubal ventilation and normal respiration. It should also have low
morbidity and mortality. Among the various methods described for its removal,
the two commonly used methods are conventional cold curettage method and
coblation technique. The purpose of this study was to collate the safety and
efficacy of endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy with the conventional curettage
A prospective comparative study with fifty patients was studied who underwent
adenoidectomy. Twenty five patients underwent endoscopy assisted coblation
adenoidectomy and twenty five patients underwent regular adenoidectomy by
Patients who underwent coblation adenoidectomy showed better results during
follow up in terms of completeness of removal. 80 % of children undergoing
regular adenoidectomy by curettage method showed remnant adenoid tissue in
the nasopharynx at the end of the procedure. But it was 6 % among the children
undergoing endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy. The mean duration of
operation was higher for endoscopic assisted coblation adenoidectomy which
was significant statistically. The mean blood loss was 30.36 ml in regular
curettage adenoidectomy; 10.6 ml with endoscopic coblation adenoidectomy.
The grading of pain was significantly lower in endoscopic assisted coblation
adenoidectomy. There was no significant difference between two groups in
terms of eustachian tube function after surgery.
Coblation adenoidectomy has significant advantages over conventional
adenoidectomy in terms of completeness of removal, reduced blood loss, and
lower post-operative pain grade.