Bipolar radiofrequency cold ablation turbinate reduction for obstructive inferior turbinate hypertrophy

Published on 09/05/2015 by admin

Filed under Otolaryngology

Last modified 09/05/2015

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 3.1 (27 votes)

This article have been viewed 2525 times

Chapter 23 Bipolar radiofrequency cold ablation turbinate reduction for obstructive inferior turbinate hypertrophy


As with any surgical procedure, patient selection has a tremendous impact on postsurgical outcomes. Although many patients with OSA and/or snoring complain of nasal obstruction or nasal congestion, the etiologies for these symptoms may be multiple and multifactorial. Conversely, a number of patients with OSA/S may complain little about symptomatic nasal obstruction but upon examination are found to have several anatomic factors that may contribute to nasal obstruction. Therefore, independent of reported symptoms, all patients with OSA/S require a detailed nasal examination, typically including fiberoptic trans-nasal endoscopy. The examiner must note the presence or absence of inferior turbinate hypertrophy, nasal septal deviation, sinonasal polyposis and adenoid hypertrophy. Other factors that may also contribute to nasal obstruction (i.e. making one or more of the above more symptomatic) but may be less anatomically evident include nasal valve collapse and the relative size of the piriform aperture.

With respect to inferior turbinate hypertrophy, the relative size of the inferior turbinate along its full length must be assessed. It is not uncommon to find patients with relatively normal-appearing anterior inferior turbinates, but with very pronounced posterior (tail) cobblestoned turbinate hypertrophy. The relationship of the inferior turbinate hypertrophy to nasal septal deviation in particular should be assessed. Some patients with septal deviation may yet still be candidates for inferior turbinate reduction alone if the turbinate component is felt to contribute substantially more to the nasal obstruction. Unfortunately, no clear-cut testing modality will define the individual contributions to nasal obstruction for these anatomic factors. However, we and others have found that a topical nasal decongestant test with neosynephrine or oxymetazoline may help identify patients more likely to benefit from inferior turbinate reduction. Patients must be cautioned that this pharmacologic turbinate reduction is supraphysiological and may exaggerate what is achievable with mechanical inferior turbinate reduction. Those patients who demonstrate an improvement in their subjective sense of nasal breathing and/or objectively demonstrate improvement in their nasal patency (as measured by acoustic rhinometry or nasal endoscopy) are more likely to achieve benefit with inferior turbinate reduction alone. We avoid mixing topical lidocaine in conjunction with topical decongestants because it may confound the patient’s subjective assessment of their nasal breathing. A small fraction of patients will have limited improvement with topical decongestion, still demonstrating large inferior turbinates. These patients often have a large bony (concha) inferior turbinate and may be better candidates for submucous resection techniques. Patients with significant nasal septal deviation (especially in the anterior or mid-nasal cavity), sinonasal polyposis or adenoid hypertrophy are often not good candidates for inferior turbinate reduction alone.

Part of patient selection is appropriate patient counseling and ensuring the patient’s understanding of the goals of the procedure as well as treatment outcomes. Patients should be informed and understand that coblation inferior to reduction may be only component in addressing nasal obstruction with further therapy being required. Further therapy may include repeated coblation inferior turbinate reduction sessions to address middle or posterior turbinate hypertrophy or further sessions to achieve the desired volume of turbinate reduction.