Hostname: page-component-699b5d5946-l4bsl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-03T12:06:13.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Turbinate volume reduction under local anaesthesia: randomised clinical trial – our experience

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2025

Saad El Zayat ,
Ibrahim Mahmoud Gehad Open the ORCID record for Ibrahim Mahmoud Gehad [Opens in a new window] ,
Ibrahim A. Abdulghaffar ,
Amr Maher Shady  and
Ahmed Elgendy
Saad El Zayat
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt
Ibrahim Mahmoud Gehad*
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt
Ibrahim A. Abdulghaffar
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt
Amr Maher Shady
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt
Ahmed Elgendy
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt
*
Corresponding author: Ibrahim Mahmoud Gehad; Email: Ibrahimgehad94@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives

To compare between two methods of radiofrequency (coblation and radiofrequency volume reduction) in turbinate volume reduction under local anaesthesia regarding efficacy, pain, and crust formation.

Methods

In a prospective randomised double-blinded trial, 90 patients were randomised into two groups in a 1:1 ratio where group (I) underwent submucosal turbinate reduction using coblation radiofrequency while group (II) underwent turbinate reduction using conventional radiofrequency using radiofrequency volume reduction technique. Patients were assessed by Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation for technique efficacy, pain visual analogue scale score, Endoscopic Turbinate Grading scale, and crust formation 1, 6, and 12 months post-operative.

Results

Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation score showed significant difference between patients in the same group compared to baseline (p < 0.001), pain visual analogue scale was significantly higher in radiofrequency group (p < 0.001) and there was no significant statistical difference regarding crust formation.

Conclusion

Both techniques are tolerable, effective, and safe for turbinate reduction under local anaesthesia in patients with mainly soft-tissue component turbinate hypertrophy.

Keywords

nasal obstructionhypertrophylaser scalpelradiofrequency ablationturbinatesanesthesialocal

Information

Type
Main Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 139 , Issue 12 , December 2025 , pp. 1219 - 1226
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Ibrahim Mahmoud Gehad takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Aslan, G. Postnasal drip due to inferior turbinate perforation after radiofrequency turbinate surgery: a case report. Allergy Rhinol (Providence) 2013;4:e17–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kizilkaya, Z, Ceylan, K, Emir, H, Yavanoglu, A, Unlu, I, Samim, E., et al. Comparison of radiofrequency tissue volume reduction and submucosal resection with microdebrider in inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;138:176–81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seeger, J, Zenev, E, Gundlach, P, Stein, T, Müller, G. Bipolar radiofrequency-induced thermotherapy of turbinate hypertrophy: pilot study and 20 months’ follow-up. Laryngoscope 2003;113:130–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kafle, P, Maharjan, M, Shrestha, S, Toran, KC. Comparison of sub mucosal diathermy and partial resection of inferior turbinate in the treatment of symptomatic nasal valve blockage. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ) 2007;5:501–3Google ScholarPubMed
Hytönen, ML, Bäck, LJJ, Malmivaara, AV, Roine, RP. Radiofrequency thermal ablation for patients with nasal symptoms: a systematic review of effectiveness and complications. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009;266:1257–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hol, MK, Huizing, EH. Treatment of inferior turbinate pathology: a review and critical evaluation of the different techniques. Rhinology 2000;38:157–66Google Scholar
Shehata, EM, Ragab, SM, Behiry, ABS, Erfan, FHA, Gamea, AM. Telescopic-assisted radiofrequency adenoidectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Laryngoscope 2005;115:162–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sapçi, T, Sahin, B, Karavus, A, Akbulut, UG. Comparison of the effects of radiofrequency tissue ablation, CO₂ laser ablation, and partial turbinectomy applications on nasal mucociliary functions. Laryngoscope 2003;113:514–19CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farmer, SEJ, Quine, SM, Eccles, R. Efficacy of inferior turbinate coblation for treatment of nasal obstruction. J Laryngol Otol 2009;123:309–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deenadayal, DS, kumar, MN, Sudhakshin, P, Hameed, S. Radiofrequency reduction of inferior turbinates in allergic and non allergic rhinitis. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;66(suppl 1):231–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Islamoglu, Y, Kesici, GG, Bulut, KS, Ozer, EA, Teleke, YC, Babademez, MA. New wand coblation turbinator vs coblation radiofrequency. Am J Otolaryngol 2019;40:650–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amer, MA, Kabbash, IA, Younes, A, Elzayat, S, Tomoum, MO. Validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Arabic version of the nasal obstruction symptom evaluation scale. Laryngoscope 2017;127:2455–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Camacho, M, Zaghi, S, Certal, V, Abdullatif, J, Means, C, Acevedo, J, et al. Inferior turbinate classification system, grades 1 to 4: development and validation study. Laryngoscope 2015;125:296–302CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puterman, MM, Segal, N, Joshua, BZ. Endoscopic, assisted, modified turbinoplasty with mucosal flap. J Laryngol Otol 2012;126:525–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, M, Rebeiz, E. Office-based inferior turbinate reduction using bipolar cautery: technique and results. Am J Otolaryngol 2020;41:102449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Rienzo Businco, L, Di Rienzo Businco, A, Lauriello, M. Comparative study on the effectiveness of coblation-assisted turbinoplasty in allergic rhinitis. Rhinology 2010;48:174–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Passali, D, Loglisci, M, Politi, L, Passali, GC, Kern, E. Managing turbinate hypertrophy: coblation vs. radiofrequency treatment. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273:1449–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mehta, N, Mehta, S, Mehta, N. Coblation-assisted turbinoplasty: a comparative analysis of Reflex Ultra and Turbinator Wand. Ear Nose Throat J 2019;98:E51–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakshi, SS, Manoharan, KS, Gopalakrishnan, S. Comparison of the long term efficacy of radiofrequency ablation and surgical turbinoplasty in inferior turbinate hypertrophy: a randomized clinical study. Acta Otolaryngol 2017;137:856–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vijay Kumar, K, Kumar, S, Garg, S. A comparative study of radiofrequency assisted versus microdebrider assisted turbinoplasty in cases of inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014;66:35–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, CM, Tan, CD, Lee, FP, Lin, KN, Huang, HM. Microdebrider-assisted versus radiofrequency-assisted inferior turbinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2009;119:414–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, S, Ramli, RR, Wan Mohammad, Z, Abdullah, B. Coblation versus microdebrider-assisted turbinoplasty for endoscopic inferior turbinates reduction. Auris Nasus Larynx 2020;47:593–601CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavaliere, M, Mottola, G, Iemma, M. Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of radiofrequency turbinoplasty and traditional surgical technique in treatment of inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;133:972–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed