Radiofrequency ablation vs. microdebrider-assisted turbinoplasty in chronic nasal obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

<p><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">Chronic nasal obstruction </span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">that caused by</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15"> inferior turbinate hypertrophy is common</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15"> thus </span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">surgical intervention is needed when medical treatments fail. </span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">Micro</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">debrider-assisted turbinoplasty (MAT) and radiofre</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">quency ablation (RFA) represent two minimally invasive approaches</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">, yet their comparative long-term efficacy and safety remain subject of debate</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">. </span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of MAT and RFA in improving both objective and subjective measures of nasal obstruction, as well as to evaluate their respective safety profiles. </span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">The</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the last ten years. The studies included were those that compared MAT and RFA in adults with turbinate hypertrophy.</span></span> <span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">The analysis of the included RCTs showed that both MAT and RFA provided significant and comparable short-term improvements (3-12 months) in objective nasal airflow and subjective nasal obstruction. However, long-term data (up to 3 years) indicated that MAT resulted in superior outcomes, including greater improvement in nasal patency and a significantly lower rate of disease recurrence.</span></span> <span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">The safety profiles of the two techniques also varied; RFA was associated with prolonged postoperative crusting, while MAT had a higher incidence of intraoperative bleeding. In conclusion, both MAT and RFA are effective treatments for inferior turbinate hypertrophy. For patients seeking a more durable long-term solution, MAT is recommended due to its superior efficacy and lower recurrence rates. Ultimately</span></span><span class="s5"><span class="bumpedFont15">, clinical decision should be customized based on patient preference and a through discussion of specific risk profiles.</span></span></p>