Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2026
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Longitudinal Incision for Endoscopic Submucosal Excavation of Gastric Subepithelial Lesions
Published on: April 28, 2026
Comparison of open versus endoscopic resection of inverted papilloma
Nathan B Sautter1, Steven B Cannady, Martin J Citardi
1Section of Nasal and Sinus Disorders, Head and Neck Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Background:
Lateral rhinotomy with medial maxillectomy has served as the standard for surgical management of inverted papilloma (IP) in the pre-endoscopic era; since the late 1980s, endoscopic techniques have emerged as the minimally invasive alternative. The objective of this study was twofold: (1) to compare operative parameters, complications, and recurrence rates and (2) predictive factors for recurrence for open versus endoscopic cases of IP resection.
Methods:
Retrospective data analysis was performed on 68 patients with histopathologically confirmed IP treated at a tertiary care medical center from January 1983 to May 2005. Parameters for comparison included operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (HS), complications, and recurrence rate. Predictive factors for recurrence including open versus endoscopic cases, primary versus secondary IP, and tumor by Krouse stage were analyzed.
Results:
The average age at time of presentation was 57.4 years with a male/female ratio of 2.2:1. Forty-nine patients underwent endoscopic resection, 13 patients underwent open resection, and 6 patients underwent limited open resection. Average OT and EBL were statistically similar for the three groups, whereas the average HS was statistically shorter (p = 0.002) for the endoscopic group. Biopsy-proven recurrence was noted in 11 (22%) endoscopic cases, 5 (39%) open cases, and 3 (50%) limited open cases. After reresection, all patients were free of disease. Mean follow-up was 16 months, 56 months, and 69 months for the endoscopic, open, and limited open groups, respectively. Analysis of predictive factors indicated that the surgical approach and primary versus secondary IP, regardless of approach, did not statistically impact recurrence rate. Chi-square analysis illustrated that patients with advanced-stage IP had a higher risk of recurrence (p = 0.002), regardless of surgical technique.
Conclusion:
In this series, endoscopic resection of IP was associated with shorter HS and equivalent EBL and OT compared with the open groups. The overall recurrence rate was lower in the endoscopic group with acceptable morbidity compared with the open and limited open groups. Thus, the endoscopic approach may serve as a superior alternative to the open approaches for successful extirpation of IP.
