Does Endoscopic Adenoidectomy Really Make a Difference? A Retrospective Comparison with Conventional Adenoidectomy

Endoscopic vs. Conventional Adenoidectomy

Abstract

Objective: To compare endoscopic and conventional curettage adenoidectomy in terms of operative time, postoperative pain, complications, and recurrence.

Methods: This retrospective, observational comparative study screened 532 adenoidectomy cases performed between December 2015 and December 2024. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 143 patients were included in the final analysis: 73 in the endoscopic group and 70 in the conventional group, all of whom had a follow-up period of at least 12 months. Postoperative pain was assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS) at 6 and 12 hours. Recurrence at 1 year was defined as recurrence of symptoms accompanied by endoscopic evidence of adenoid hypertrophy of grade ≥ 2.

Results: Groups were comparable in sex, age, and preoperative adenoid grade. Postoperative VAS pain (4.84 ± 1.31 vs. 4.34 ± 1.34; p = 0.033) and operative time (30.75 ± 8.11 vs. 15.64 ± 5.03 minutes; p < 0.001) were significantly greater in the endoscopic group. No perioperative complications occurred in the endoscopic group, whereas one patient (1.4%) in the conventional group experienced postoperative bleeding (p = 0.490). No recurrence was observed in the endoscopic group. Recurrence occurred in two patients (2.9%) in the conventional group at the 1-year follow-up (p = 0.238).

Conclusion: Endoscopic adenoidectomy was associated with longer operative time and higher early postoperative pain. Complication and recurrence rates were lower in the endoscopic group; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance.