[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
December 1931

OBSERVATIONS FOLLOWING ADENOIDECTOMY

Author Affiliations

WATERVILLE, MAINE

Arch Otolaryngol. 1931;14(6):775-783. doi:10.1001/archotol.1931.03580020866006
Abstract

Observations in a considerable number of cases following tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy compel the feeling that more often it is adenoidectomy that falls short of the desired result, especially in the younger patients, although these failings are not so frequently recognized. In the discussion of a symposium on adenoids before the American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society in 1900, Dr. Joseph A. White1 said that he was never satisfied that all the adenoid was thoroughly removed, and advocated the use of a palate retractor for visual inspection of the postnasal space. Jervey,2 in 1920, said he had "contemplated with a feeling of dissatisfaction and mortification the frequent inadequacy of the operation for the removal of the nasopharyngeal adenoid." Shurley,3 in his discussion of Kelley's paper before this Section in 1923, said that it was a well known fact that adenoidectomy was as badly done as any operation in

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×