A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF POWERED VERSUS CONVENTIONAL FUNCTIONAL ENDOSCOPIC SINUS SURGERY FOR NASAL POLYPS WITH REFERENCE TO RECURRENCE

Suman Reddy Dakkata; Satujoda Susmitha; Kalyani Hanumanthu; Surendra Kumar chowdary; Boni Tata Rao; Ravada V S S K Kinneresh

Authors

Suman Reddy Dakkata Assistant Professor, Department of ENT, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author
Satujoda Susmitha Assistant Professor, Department of ENT, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author
Kalyani Hanumanthu Assistant Professor, Department of ENT, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author
Surendra Kumar chowdary Associate Professor, Department of ENT, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author
Boni Tata Rao Professor & Head, Department of ENT, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author
Ravada V S S K Kinneresh Department of Dentistry, Great Eastern Medical School & Hospital (GEMS), Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India. Author

Abstract

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps is a common inflammatory condition that significantly affects quality of life and often requires surgical intervention when refractory to medical management. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is the standard surgical treatment, with advances in instrumentation such as powered microdebriders proposed to improve surgical precision and outcomes. However, comparative data evaluating powered versus conventional FESS remain limited in the Indian clinical setting.

Objectives: To compare the clinical, endoscopic, and radiological outcomes of powered functional endoscopic sinus surgery using a microdebrider versus conventional functional endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with nasal polyposis.

Methods: This prospective interventional comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital over one year. Fifty patients aged 18–60 years with chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps refractory to medical therapy were included and divided into two equal groups. Group A underwent conventional FESS, while Group B underwent powered FESS using a microdebrider. Assessment included symptom evaluation using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), diagnostic nasal endoscopy with polyp grading, and CT of the paranasal sinuses graded using the Lund–Mackay scoring system. Outcomes included symptom scores, endoscopic findings, radiological improvement, recurrence, and postoperative complications. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Both techniques were reported to improve symptoms, endoscopic polyp grades, and radiological scores. The source manuscript reports greater improvement and lower recurrence with powered FESS, but does not provide complete numerical outcome data in its summary tables.

Conclusion: Powered FESS using a microdebrider may offer advantages in symptom relief, disease clearance, recurrence, and synechiae. These conclusions should be interpreted cautiously because the manuscript tables do not report complete group-wise numerical data.