Author(s): Akshata Marathe

Abstract: Objective: This meta-analysis evaluates the differences in surgical efficacy, intraoperative parameters, postoperative outcomes, and complications between conventional curettage adenoidectomy (CCA) and microdebrider-assisted adenoidectomy (MAA).Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for studies published between 2015 and 2025 comparing CCA and MAA. Inclusion criteria consisted of randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and systematic reviews. Statistical analysis was performed using a random-effects model to assess pooled mean differences, risk ratios, and confidence intervals.Results: Analysis of 12 studies showed that MAA had a longer operative time (+4.8 minutes; p<0.05) and slightly greater intraoperative blood loss (+12.3 mL; p<0.05) than CCA. However, MAA resulted in significantly lower residual adenoid tissue (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.18-0.57), reduced postoperative pain (SMD: -1.2; p<0.01), and faster recovery times. MAA also had a lower incidence of Eustachian tube injury (RR: 0.52; p=0.03), though it carried a slightly higher risk of intraoperative bleeding (RR: 1.24; p=0.04). No significant differences were found in infection rates (p=0.79).Conclusion: MAA offers superior adenoid removal and better postoperative recovery compared to CCA. However, increased operative time and intraoperative blood loss may be limiting factors. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to establish definitive clinical guidelines.

DOI: 10.22271/27081494.2025.v7.i1d.166

Pages: 194-195 | Views: 54 | Downloads: 24

Download Full Article: Click Here