Journal archive · Septum, valve and airway · 2024
Modified extracorporeal septoplasty: prospective study
Migliavacca RO, Lavinsky M, de Souza OE, Friedrich EP, Cionek OAGD, Subda LF, Bernardi BL.
In the archive as a landmark paper: the core sweep runs 2011–2026, and this one is here because the history of rhinoplasty rests on it · cited on extracorporeal septoplasty.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate quality-of-life and satisfaction outcomes in patients undergoing the MES using the Portuguese version of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE-p) and Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE), and also to evaluate the frequency of possible complications of this technique.
Methods: We conducted a single-center prospective study with patients who had the indication for MES, from May 2016 to September 2020 at the Facial Plastic Surgery Clinic of Otolaryngology Department of the Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre. The primary outcome was the relative postoperative change in NOSE-p. Secondary outcome was the variation in ROE, a validated quality-of-life questionnaire for rhinoplasty patients.
Results: Of the 31 patients submitted to extracorporeal septorhinoplasty who were evaluated, twenty-seven patients were included. Preoperative and postoperative NOSE-p scale scores were 65.2 ± 29.9 and 23.5 ± 26.7, respectively (mean differences of 42.04; [95% CI 27.35-56.73]; p < 0.0001). Pre and postoperative ROE scores were 38.3 ± 24.3 vs. 67.29 ± 29.7, respectively (mean differences of -29.02; [95% CI -40.5 to -17.5]; p = 0.0001). Residual septal deviation was verified in 2 patients (7.4%).
Conclusion: Most of the patients submitted to modified extracorporeal septoplasty had a significant improvement in quality of life scores of nasal obstruction, with good aesthetical outcomes and low indices of postoperative complications.
Level Of Evidence: Level 3.
Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).
Citation
Start here
What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topic, cited line by line to PubMed.
Related papers
Same topic, 2024.
- ASJ Comparison of Functional and Cosmetic Outcomes Between Dorsal Preservation and Spreader Flap Rhinoplasty: A Randomized TrialZarei R, Most SP, Amali A et al.2024PMID 38366551Summary
- ASJ Simultaneous Rhinoplasty and Septal Perforation Repair Using the Bone-Cartilaginous UnitSazgar AA, Sazgar MA, Zarringhalam MA et al.2024PMID 38648541Summary
- APS A Retrospective Study on the Reconstruction of Nasal Septal Mucosal Defects after Asian RhinoplastyDeng Y, Wang X, Qiao Z et al.2024PMID 37749417Summary
- APS Comparison of Aesthetic and Functional Rhinoplasty Outcomes Between Patients with Body Dysmorphic Disorder and Normal IndividualsMoosaie F, Javankiani S, Mansournia MA et al.2024PMID 38575764Summary
- APS Long-Term Control of Nasal Tip Position: Quantitative Assessment of Caudal Septal Extension GraftMookerjee VG, Shah J, Carney MJ et al.2024PMID 37721626Full text
- APS Optimizing Postoperative Care in Rhinoplasty and Septoplasty: A Review of the Role of Nasal Packing and Alternatives in Complication ManagementCaimi E, Balza A, Vaccari S et al.2024PMID 38485786Summary
- APS Partial Extracorporeal Septoplasty in Crooked NosesPradhan P, Kharwanlang M, Preetam C et al.2024PMID 37605016Abstract
- APS Rhinoplasty with Mortise-Tenon Cartilaginous Framework for Caudal Septal Cartilage DefectsZhang X, Song Z, Xu Y et al.2024PMID 37945758Summary