Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 22, 2026
CO2-Lasertonsillotomy Under Local Anesthesia in Adults
Published on: November 6, 2019
Endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy versus conventional curettage adenoidectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized
Liyun Yang1, Yamin Shan1, Shili Wang1
1Department of Otolaryngology, Ruijin Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, 197, Ruijin 2nd Road, Shanghai, 200025 China.
Abstract:
Adenoidectomy, surgical removal of hypertrophic adenoids, is a common operation in children worldwide. The purpose of this study was to compare the operative effectiveness, and included total operative time, blood loss and complications, between endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy and conventional curettage adenoidectomy. EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure and symposiums and review articles were used to choose relevant randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis was performed to analyze the data for total operative time, blood loss and complications. Seven studies fit the inclusion criteria, and included 331 patients treated with endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy, and 251 patients treated with conventional curettage adenoidectomy. The meta-analysis demonstrated that compared with conventional curettage adenoidectomy, endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy had a shorter operative time (SMD -1.09; 95 % CI -1.29 to -0.90; p < 0.00001), less blood loss (MD -19.74; 95 % CI -22.75 to -16.73; p < 0.00001), and fewer complications (OR 0.15; 95 % CI 0.07-0.35; p < 0.0001). Endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy has advantages over conventional curettage adenoidectomy with regard to total operative time, blood loss and complications.
