ArticleIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India2025
Microdebrider Assisted Endoscopic Sinus Surgery Versus Conventional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery in Management of Sinonasal Polyposis.
Article in Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introducing powered instrumentation causes drastically changes regarding the endoscopic sinus surgery performance. Such technology has a particular usage in treating different forms of CRS with nasal polyposis. In the therapy of sinonasal polyposis, we report the accuracy of surgery with a microdebrider to typical endoscopic sinus surgery instruments. A prospective randomized comparative investigation has been carried out at Al Azhar University Hospital-ENT department, involving 80 patients who were radiologically and clinically diagnosed with bilateral sinonasal polyposis. These patients had not exhibited improvement with previous medical treatments. The diagnosed cases were equally allocated into two groups, Group A (microdebrider group), who underwent microdebrider, and Group B (conventional Group), who underwent surgery with traditional equipment (Messerklinger approach). The intraoperative blood loss differs significantly among the two groups. In Group A, intraoperative blood loss seems to be much lower in individuals who had FESS with the use of a Microdebrider. Group A had mean surgery duration of 130 min, while Group B had a mean surgery time of 163 min. In the treatment of sinonasal polyposis, a microdebrider has some advantages over Conventional endoscopic sinus surgery. For people with sinonasal polyposis, powerful endoscopic sinus surgery is a preferable therapy option. It creates a dry operating field allowing better visualization and cuts down on operative duration. The current study shows that while these tools may be beneficial, they are not required for successful Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS) outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.