OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the results of powered turbinoplasty and to compare these with submucosal cauterization of the inferior turbinates. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, comparative surgical trial. METHODS:Nineteen patients with medication-resistant chronic nasal obstruction caused by inferior turbinate hypertrophy were randomized to undergo powered turbinoplasty on one side and submucosal cauterization on the other. For each side, an extensive assessment (symptom scoring, endoscopic scoring, and acoustic rhinometry) was recorded preoperatively and on week 1, week 3, month 3, year 1, and year 5 postoperatively. RESULTS: Powered turbinoplasty was superior to submucosal cauterization on all aspects of the assessment. A significant difference (P < .05) was noted for postoperative crusting, endoscopical scoring of turbinate size, and acoustic rhinometry measurements of nasal cavity volume and mean area at the level of the nasal valve. In addition, the results of powered turbinoplasty were still apparent on long term follow-up, whereas submucosal cauterization was associated with a recurrence of turbinate hypertrophy. CONCLUSION: Performing a powered turbinoplasty leads to decreased patient morbidity during the postoperative healing and to a better control of long-term results when compared with submucosal cauterization.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the results of powered turbinoplasty and to compare these with submucosal cauterization of the inferior turbinates. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, comparative surgical trial. METHODS: Nineteen patients with medication-resistant chronic nasal obstruction caused by inferior turbinate hypertrophy were randomized to undergo powered turbinoplasty on one side and submucosal cauterization on the other. For each side, an extensive assessment (symptom scoring, endoscopic scoring, and acoustic rhinometry) was recorded preoperatively and on week 1, week 3, month 3, year 1, and year 5 postoperatively. RESULTS: Powered turbinoplasty was superior to submucosal cauterization on all aspects of the assessment. A significant difference (P < .05) was noted for postoperative crusting, endoscopical scoring of turbinate size, and acoustic rhinometry measurements of nasal cavity volume and mean area at the level of the nasal valve. In addition, the results of powered turbinoplasty were still apparent on long term follow-up, whereas submucosal cauterization was associated with a recurrence of turbinate hypertrophy. CONCLUSION: Performing a powered turbinoplasty leads to decreased patient morbidity during the postoperative healing and to a better control of long-term results when compared with submucosal cauterization.