Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine which technique of uncinectomy, classical or swing door technique. Materials and Methods: Four hundred eighty Cases of sinusitis were selected and operated for Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS). Out of these, in 240 uncinectomies classical uncinectomy was done whereas in another 240 uncinectomies swing door technique was used. Initially patients were medically managed treated according to their symptoms and prior management. Patients who had received previous adequate medical management were evaluated with CT scan of the sinuses. If disease still persists than they were operated for FESS. Results: The authors' experience indicates that Functional endoscopic sinus surgery can be performed under local or general anesthesia, as permitted or tolerated. In this review classical technique was used in 240 uncinectomies. Out of this, ethmoidal complex injury was noted in 4 cases, missed maxillary ostium syndrome (incomplete removal) was reported in 12 patients and orbital fat exposure was encountered in 5 patients. As compared to 240 uncinectomies done with swing door technique, incomplete removal was evident in 2 cases and lacrimal duct injury was reported in 3 cases. 'Evidence that underscores how this 'swing door technique' successfully combines 'the conservation goals of the anterior-to-posterior approach and anatomic virtues of the posterior-to-anterior approach to ethmoidectomy of the total 480 uncinectomies operated. Out of which 240 uncinectomies have been performed using the 'swing-door' technique. The 240 uncinectomies performed using classical technique were used as controls. The incidence of orbital penetration, incomplete removal, ethmoidal complex injury and ostium non-identification was significantly less with the new technique. Three lacrimal injuries occurred with the 'swing-door' technique compared to no injuries with classical technique. Conclusion: The authors recommend swing door technique as it is easy to learn, allows complete removal of the uncinate flush with the lateral nasal wall and allows easy identification of the natural ostium of the maxillary sinus without injuring the ethmoidal complex
Abdel-Hak B, Gunkel A, Kanonier G, Schrott-Fischer A, Ulmer H, Thumfart W. Ciliary beat frequency, olfaction and endoscopic sinus surgery. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1998; 60(4): 202-5.
Erminy M, Bonfils P. Acute and chronic sphenoid sinusitis. Review of the literature. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 1998; 115(3): 106-16.
Buehring I, Friedrich B, Schaaf J, Schmidt H, Ahrens P, Zielen S. Chronic sinusitis refractory to standard management in patients with humoral immunodeficiencies. Clin Exp Immunol 1997; 109(3): 468-72.
Park AH, Lau J, Stankiewicz J, Chow J. The role of functional endoscopic sinus surgery in asthmatic patients. J Otolaryngol 1998; 27(5): 275-80.
Moses RL, Cornetta A, Atkins JP Jr, Roth M, Rosen MR, Keane WM. Revision endoscopic sinus surgery: The Thomas Jefferson University experience. Ear Nose Throat J 1998; 77(3): 190-202.
Senior BA, Kennedy DW, Tanabodee J, Kroger H, Hassab M, Lanza D. Long-term results of functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope 1998; 108(2): 151-7.
Vanclooster C, Jorissen M. Endoscopic septal spur resection in combination with endoscopic sinus surgery. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 1998; 52(4): 335-9.
Coste A, Idrissi F, Beautru R, Lenoir G, Reinert P, Manach Y, et al. Endoscopic endonasalethmoidectomy in severe sinusitis of cystic fibrosis. Mid-term results in 12 patients. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 1997; 114(4): 99-104.
Sabini P, Josephson GD, Reisacher WR, Pincus R. The role of endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Am J Otolaryngol 1998; 19(6): 351-6.
Halvorson DJ, Dupree JR, Porubsky ES. Management of chronic sinusitis in the adult cystic fibrosis patient. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1998; 107(11 Pt 1): 946-52.
Parsons DS, Stivers FE, Talbot AR. The missed ostium sequence and the surgical approach to revision functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1996; 29:169-83.
Singhania, A. A., Bansal, C., Chauhan, N., & Soni, S. (2012). A Comparative Study of Two Different Uncinectomy Techniques: Swing-Door and Classical. Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 24(2), 63-67. doi: 10.22038/ijorl.2011.205
MLA
Ankit A Singhania; Chetan Bansal; Nirali Chauhan; Saurav Soni. "A Comparative Study of Two Different Uncinectomy Techniques: Swing-Door and Classical", Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 24, 2, 2012, 63-67. doi: 10.22038/ijorl.2011.205
HARVARD
Singhania, A. A., Bansal, C., Chauhan, N., Soni, S. (2012). 'A Comparative Study of Two Different Uncinectomy Techniques: Swing-Door and Classical', Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 24(2), pp. 63-67. doi: 10.22038/ijorl.2011.205
VANCOUVER
Singhania, A. A., Bansal, C., Chauhan, N., Soni, S. A Comparative Study of Two Different Uncinectomy Techniques: Swing-Door and Classical. Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 2012; 24(2): 63-67. doi: 10.22038/ijorl.2011.205