Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Karadavut,Yunus
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Akyıldız,Ilker, Karadaş,Hatice, Dinç,Aykut Erdem, Tulacı,Gökçe, Tastan,Eren
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942017000100059
Resumo: Abstract Introduction Septal deviation is a common disease seen in daily otorhinolaryngology practice and septoplasty is a commonly performed surgical procedure. Caudal septum deviation is also a challenging pathology for ear, nose, and throat specialists. Many techniques are defined for caudal septal deviation. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft (CSEG) application in patients who underwent endonasal septoplasty for a short and deviated nasal septum. Methods Forty patients with nasal septal deviation, short nasal septum, and weak nasal tip support who underwent endonasal septoplasty with or without CSEG placement between August 2012 and June 2013 were enrolled in this study. Twenty patients underwent endonasal septoplasty with CSEG placement. The rest of the group, who rejected auricular or costal cartilage harvest for CSEG placement, underwent only endonasal septoplasty without any additional intervention. Using the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) and Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaires, pre- and post-operative acoustic rhinometer measurements were evaluated to assess the effect of CESG placement on nasal obstruction. Results In the control group, preoperative and postoperative minimal cross-sectional areas (MCA1) were 0.44 ± 0.10 cm2 and 0.60 ± 0.11 cm2, respectively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative MCA1 values were 0.45 ± 0.16 cm2 and 0.67 ± 0.16 cm2, respectively (p < 0.01). In the control group, the nasal cavity volume (VOL1) value was 1.71 ± 0.21 mL preoperatively and 1.94 ± 0.17 mL postoperatively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative VOL1s were 1.72 ± 0.15 mL and 1.97 ± 0.12 mL, respectively (p < 0.001). Statistical analysis of postoperative MCA1 and VOL1 values in the study and the control groups could not detect any significant intergroup difference (p = 0.093 and 0.432, respectively). In the study group, mean nasolabial angles were 78.15 ± 4.26º and 90.70 ± 2.38º, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion Endonasal septoplasty with CESG placement is an effective surgical procedure with minimal complication rate for subjects who have a deviated, short nasal septum and weak nasal tip support.
id ABORL-F-1_0108c26c6b37b00c955fd201b9cd15a7
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1808-86942017000100059
network_acronym_str ABORL-F-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository_id_str
spelling Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplastyNasal septumNasal cartilageNasal obstructionIntranasal surgeryGraftingAbstract Introduction Septal deviation is a common disease seen in daily otorhinolaryngology practice and septoplasty is a commonly performed surgical procedure. Caudal septum deviation is also a challenging pathology for ear, nose, and throat specialists. Many techniques are defined for caudal septal deviation. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft (CSEG) application in patients who underwent endonasal septoplasty for a short and deviated nasal septum. Methods Forty patients with nasal septal deviation, short nasal septum, and weak nasal tip support who underwent endonasal septoplasty with or without CSEG placement between August 2012 and June 2013 were enrolled in this study. Twenty patients underwent endonasal septoplasty with CSEG placement. The rest of the group, who rejected auricular or costal cartilage harvest for CSEG placement, underwent only endonasal septoplasty without any additional intervention. Using the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) and Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaires, pre- and post-operative acoustic rhinometer measurements were evaluated to assess the effect of CESG placement on nasal obstruction. Results In the control group, preoperative and postoperative minimal cross-sectional areas (MCA1) were 0.44 ± 0.10 cm2 and 0.60 ± 0.11 cm2, respectively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative MCA1 values were 0.45 ± 0.16 cm2 and 0.67 ± 0.16 cm2, respectively (p < 0.01). In the control group, the nasal cavity volume (VOL1) value was 1.71 ± 0.21 mL preoperatively and 1.94 ± 0.17 mL postoperatively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative VOL1s were 1.72 ± 0.15 mL and 1.97 ± 0.12 mL, respectively (p < 0.001). Statistical analysis of postoperative MCA1 and VOL1 values in the study and the control groups could not detect any significant intergroup difference (p = 0.093 and 0.432, respectively). In the study group, mean nasolabial angles were 78.15 ± 4.26º and 90.70 ± 2.38º, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion Endonasal septoplasty with CESG placement is an effective surgical procedure with minimal complication rate for subjects who have a deviated, short nasal septum and weak nasal tip support.Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.2017-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942017000100059Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.83 n.1 2017reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngologyinstname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)instacron:ABORL-CCF10.1016/j.bjorl.2016.01.014info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKaradavut,YunusAkyıldız,IlkerKaradaş,HaticeDinç,Aykut ErdemTulacı,GökçeTastan,Ereneng2017-02-17T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1808-86942017000100059Revistahttp://www.bjorl.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br1808-86861808-8686opendoar:2017-02-17T00:00Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
title Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
spellingShingle Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
Karadavut,Yunus
Nasal septum
Nasal cartilage
Nasal obstruction
Intranasal surgery
Grafting
title_short Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
title_full Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
title_fullStr Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
title_sort Effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft application in endonasal septoplasty
author Karadavut,Yunus
author_facet Karadavut,Yunus
Akyıldız,Ilker
Karadaş,Hatice
Dinç,Aykut Erdem
Tulacı,Gökçe
Tastan,Eren
author_role author
author2 Akyıldız,Ilker
Karadaş,Hatice
Dinç,Aykut Erdem
Tulacı,Gökçe
Tastan,Eren
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Karadavut,Yunus
Akyıldız,Ilker
Karadaş,Hatice
Dinç,Aykut Erdem
Tulacı,Gökçe
Tastan,Eren
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Nasal septum
Nasal cartilage
Nasal obstruction
Intranasal surgery
Grafting
topic Nasal septum
Nasal cartilage
Nasal obstruction
Intranasal surgery
Grafting
description Abstract Introduction Septal deviation is a common disease seen in daily otorhinolaryngology practice and septoplasty is a commonly performed surgical procedure. Caudal septum deviation is also a challenging pathology for ear, nose, and throat specialists. Many techniques are defined for caudal septal deviation. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of caudal septal extension graft (CSEG) application in patients who underwent endonasal septoplasty for a short and deviated nasal septum. Methods Forty patients with nasal septal deviation, short nasal septum, and weak nasal tip support who underwent endonasal septoplasty with or without CSEG placement between August 2012 and June 2013 were enrolled in this study. Twenty patients underwent endonasal septoplasty with CSEG placement. The rest of the group, who rejected auricular or costal cartilage harvest for CSEG placement, underwent only endonasal septoplasty without any additional intervention. Using the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) and Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaires, pre- and post-operative acoustic rhinometer measurements were evaluated to assess the effect of CESG placement on nasal obstruction. Results In the control group, preoperative and postoperative minimal cross-sectional areas (MCA1) were 0.44 ± 0.10 cm2 and 0.60 ± 0.11 cm2, respectively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative MCA1 values were 0.45 ± 0.16 cm2 and 0.67 ± 0.16 cm2, respectively (p < 0.01). In the control group, the nasal cavity volume (VOL1) value was 1.71 ± 0.21 mL preoperatively and 1.94 ± 0.17 mL postoperatively (p < 0.001). In the study group, pre- and postoperative VOL1s were 1.72 ± 0.15 mL and 1.97 ± 0.12 mL, respectively (p < 0.001). Statistical analysis of postoperative MCA1 and VOL1 values in the study and the control groups could not detect any significant intergroup difference (p = 0.093 and 0.432, respectively). In the study group, mean nasolabial angles were 78.15 ± 4.26º and 90.70 ± 2.38º, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion Endonasal septoplasty with CESG placement is an effective surgical procedure with minimal complication rate for subjects who have a deviated, short nasal septum and weak nasal tip support.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-02-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942017000100059
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1808-86942017000100059
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1016/j.bjorl.2016.01.014
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology v.83 n.1 2017
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
instname:Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron:ABORL-CCF
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
instacron_str ABORL-CCF
institution ABORL-CCF
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
collection Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial (ABORL-CCF)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista@aborlccf.org.br||revista@aborlccf.org.br
_version_ 1754575992345591808