Evaluation of operation success in patients with nasal septal deviation with quality of life scale and objective methods

Year 2011, Volume: 21 Issue: 4, 184 - 191, 22.09.2011

Erdem Mengi İbrahim Çukurova Yusuf Yalçın Orhan Gazi Yiğitbaşı Yücel Karaman

Abstract

Objectives: In this study we aimed to evaluate the quality of life during before, and after septoplasty in patients who were diagnosed with nasal septal deviation and also to demonstrate the role and importance of acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry methods in objectively demonstrating surgical success. Patients and Methods: This study was carried out in 44 patients undergoing septoplasty surgery. Patients’ preoperative complaints were evaluated by Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation NOSE scale. The pre- and postdecongestion acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry data of the patients were recorded simultaneously. One month after Cottle’s septoplasty performed as the septal surgery method, patients were re-evaluated by NOSE scale, acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry and the findings were compared with the preoperative data. Results: Compared to the patients’ preoperative values, a significant decrease in NOSE scores p<0.05 ; a significant increase in the minimal cross-sectional area MCA1, MCA2 and volume values measured by acoustic rhinometry p<0.05 and a significant decrease in the nasal resistance values measured by rhinomanometry p<0.05 were observed. No significant relationship was found between the change in patients’ preand postoperative NOSE score values and the change in their acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry data p>005 . Conclusion: Nowadays, evidence-based medical practices are increasingly gaining importance and acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry are methods that can be used in objective evaluation of operation success.

Keywords

Acoustic rhinometry, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale, rhinomanometry, septoplasty

Nazal septum deviyasyonlu hastalarda ameliyat başarısının yaşam kalitesi ölçeği ve objektif yöntemler ile değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, nazal septum deviyasyonu tanısı konulmuş hastalarda yaşam kalitesinin septoplasti öncesi ve sonrasında değerlendirilmesi, ayrıca akustik rinometri ve rinomanometri yöntemlerinin cerrahi başarının objektif olarak ortaya konulmasındaki yeri ve öneminin gösterilmesi amaçlandı.Hastalar ve Yöntemler: Bu çalışma septoplasti ameliyatı uygulanan 44 hasta üzerinde yapıldı. Hastaların ameliyat öncesi yakınmaları Nazal Obstrüksiyon Semptom Değerlendirme NOSE skalası ile değerlendirildi. Hastaların eş zamanlı olarak dekonjesyon öncesi ve sonrası akustik rinometri ve rinomanometri verileri kaydedildi. Septal cerrahi yöntemi olarak Cottle septoplastisi uygulanan hastalar, ameliyattan bir ay sonra NOSE skalası, akustik rinometri ve rinomanometri ile tekrar değerlendirildi ve bulgular ameliyat öncesi verilerle karşılaştırıldı.Bulgular: Hastaların ameliyat öncesine göre NOSE skoru değerlerinde anlamlı azalma p

Keywords

Akustik rinometri, Nazal Obstrüksiyon Semptom Değerlendirme skalası, rinomanometri, septoplasti.

References

• Miman MC. Akustik rinometri: Kullanımı, endikasyonları, sınırları. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg 2001;8:416-23.
• Hilberg O, Pedersen OF. Acoustic rhinometry: recommendations for technical specifications and standard operating procedures. Rhinol Suppl 2000;16:3-17.
• Clement PA. Committee report on standardization of rhinomanometry. Rhinology 1984;22:151-5.
• Dinis PB, Haider H. Septoplasty: long-term evaluation of results. Am J Otolaryngol 2002;23:85-90.
• Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:157-63.
• Vural S, Taş E, Gürsel AO. Evaluation of septoplasty patients with health status scale, rhinomanometry and computed tomography. [Article in Turkish] Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg 2008;18:166-70.
• Lenders H, Pirsig W. Diagnostic value of acoustic rhinometry: patients with allergic and vasomotor rhinitis compared with normal controls. Rhinology 1990;28:5-16.
• Pirilä T, Tikanto J. Unilateral and bilateral effects of nasal septum surgery demonstrated with acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and subjective assessment. Am J Rhinol 2001;15:127-33.
• Grymer LF, Illum P, Hilberg O. Septoplasty and compensatory inferior turbinate hypertrophy: a randomized study evaluated by acoustic rhinometry. J Laryngol Otol 1993;107:413-7.
• Illum P. Septoplasty and compensatory inferior turbinate hypertrophy: long-term results after randomized turbinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1997;254 Suppl 1:S89-92.
• Shemen L, Hamburg R. Preoperative and postoperative nasal septal surgery assessment with acoustic rhinometry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;117:338-42.
• Grymer LF, Hilberg O, Elbrİnd O, Pedersen OF. Acoustic rhinometry: evaluation of the nasal cavity with septal deviations, before and after septoplasty. Laryngoscope 1989;99:1180-7.
• Roithmann R, Cole P, Chapnik J, Barreto SM, Szalai JP, Zamel N. Acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and the sensation of nasal patency: a correlative study. J Otolaryngol 1994;23:454-8.
• Truilhé Y, Stoll D. Nasal comfort and Cottle septoplasty. Prospective acoustic rhinometry study apropos of 102 cases. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 2000;121:219-25.
• Kemker B, Liu X, Gungor A, Moinuddin R, Corey JP. Effect of nasal surgery on the nasal cavity as determined by acoustic rhinometry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;121:567-71.
• Tatlıpınar AU, Keser R, Anadolu Y. Septum deviasyonlarında preoperatif-postoperatif dönemde akustik rinometrik değerlendirme. K.B.B. ve BBC Dergisi 2001;9:68-73.
• Malm L. Rhinomanometric assessment for rhinologic surgery. Ear Nose Throat J 1992;71:11-6, 19.
• Broms P, Jonson B, Malm L. Rhinomanometry. IV. A pre- and postoperative evaluation in functional septoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol 1982;94:523-9.
• Jalowayski AA, Yuh YS, Koziol JA, Davidson TM. Surgery for nasal obstruction-evaluation by rhinomanometry. Laryngoscope 1983;93:341-5.
• Holmström M, Kumlien J. A clinical follow-up of septal surgery with special attention to the value of preoperative rhinomanometric examination in the decision concerning operation. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1988;13:115-20.
• Yarıktaş M, Karaoğlan İ, Doğru H, Tüz M, Yasan H, Döner F. Septorinoplasti sonrası hava akımının değerlendirilmesi. KBB Klinikleri 2004;6:14-7.
• McCaffrey TV, Kern EB. Clinical evaluation of nasal obstruction. A study of 1,000 patients. Arch Otolaryngol 1979;105:542-5.
• Grymer LF, Hilberg O, Pedersen OF, Rasmussen TR. Acoustic rhinometry: values from adults with subjective normal nasal patency. Rhinology 1991;29:35-47.
• Tomkinson A, Eccles R. Comparison of the relative abilities of acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and the visual analogue scale in detecting change in the nasal cavity in a healthy adult population. Am J Rhinol 1996;10:161-5.
• Hardcastle PF, White A, Prescott RJ. Clinical or rhinometric assessment of the nasal airway-which is better? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1988;13:381-5.
• Deliktaş H, Miman MC, Özturan O, Toplu Y, Akarçay M. Normal burunlarda subjektif nazal açıklık hissi ile objektif bulgular arasındaki uyum. KBB-Forum 2007;6:41-5.