Metanalysis of comparison for conventional functional endoscopic sinus surgery vs microdebrider assisted Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS) for patients of chronic rhinosinusitis with sinonasal polyposis

Background: When it comes to medical therapy for sinonasal polyposis, the standard surgical approach is Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS), either conventionally or with powered instruments. When compared to FESS, the more current method of microdebrider assisted FESS provides patients with a more effective therapeutic approach. The goal is to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of both techniques compared by 5 studies and assess the usefulness of microdebriders in FESS in comparison to traditional equipment. When the microdebrider was first introduced many decades ago, powered sinus instruments entered the scene. Since then, endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery have been performed using a number of other powered instruments, including the endoscopic drill (with suction-irrigation), the coblator, and the ultrasonic aspirator. We have done a metanalysis on various studies performed all over the world where both techniques have been used and compared to evaluate the outcomes on patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Sinonasal polyposis. The research demonstrated that Microdebrider-assisted FESS yields superior outcomes, including reduced intraoperative bleeding (relatively bloodless), shorter surgery duration, the combination of cutting and suction in one instrument, precise and accurate tissue removal, and decreased tissue healing time. Objective: Metanalysis of 5 studies to assess and contrast the advantages in FESS with traditional tools and Microdebrider in terms of several intra-and post-operative metrics. Study type-metanalysis: Material and methods-Metanalysis of studies done from 2014 to 2024 for evaluation of intra-and post-operative results of Conventional FESS vs Microdebrider assisted FESS. Result: By combining cutting and suction into a single instrument, microdebrider-assisted FESS improves outcomes by reducing intraoperative bleeding (which is comparatively bloodless) and surgical duration, allowing for more accurate and precise tissue removal and a shorter recovery period. Conclusion: When treating nasal polyposis, the microdebrider is far superior to traditional tools. Patients report feeling significantly better in a shorter amount of time after surgery. The surgical field is clear and bloodless, and the maneuvers are simpler for the surgeons.