Value-Based Approach to Power-Assisted Adenoidectomy

Abstract

A recognized disadvantage of power-assisted adenoidectomy (PAA) is the increased patient charge associated with the disposable instrumentation. The elimination of pathological review of routine adenoid specimens may provide a means of offsetting the increased charge, as 1) unsuspected findings are rare, and 2) PAA specimens are too traumatized to provide the microscopic detail necessary to make an unsuspected diagnosis. The pathology reports of all adenoidectomy specimens removed over a 10-year period were reviewed and combined with previously published reviews in order to estimate the prevalence of unsuspected disease. The estimated prevalence of unsuspected diagnoses found by routine pathological review of adenoid specimens is 37 per 100,000 cases (95% confidence interval, 26–51). In a separate analysis, a pathologist blinded to the technique of adenoid removal assessed the tissue effects of curette adenoidectomy versus PAA. Significant tissue damage at the microscopic level was identified in 6 of 11 specimens removed with the power-assisted technique as compared to 0 of 11 specimens removed by curette (p = .03). Eliminating histopathologic review of routine adenoidectomy specimens can potentially offset the increased patient charge of PAA by 62%. Power-assisted adenoidectomy, however, should be avoided in nonroutine cases in which the potential for occult disease exists.