Septoplasty versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum: economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: For years, the benefits of septoplasty have been questioned. Due to the scarce and inconclusive literature, several National Health Service (NHS) Clinical Commissioning Groups in England decided to add septal surgery to their list of restricted procedures with low clinical value. Recently, evidence was obtained that septoplasty is actually more effective than non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum. However, the relation between costs and effects of septoplasty remains unknown. METHODS: We conducted an economic evaluation alongside an open, multicenter, pragmatic randomized controlled trial in two tertiary and 16 secondary referral hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults with nasal obstruction and a deviated septum were randomized to (1) septoplasty with or without concurrent turbinate surgery or (2) non-surgical management consisting of (a combination of) medical treatment and watchful waiting. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Single imputation nested in the bootstrap percentile method (using 5000 bootstrap replications) was performed to assess the effect of missing data. After 12 and 24 months, we assessed the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from a healthcare and a societal perspective. RESULTS: A total of 203 adults were randomly assigned to septoplasty (N = 102) or non-surgical management (N = 101). After 12 months, the mean cost difference between septoplasty and non-surgical management using a healthcare or societal perspective was €1181 (95%CI €1038 to €1323) or €2192 per patient (95%CI €1714 to €2670), respectively. The mean QALY difference was 0.03 per patient (95%CI - 0.01 to 0.07). Incremental costs per QALY gained from a healthcare or societal perspective were €41,763 or €77,525, respectively. After 24 months, the mean cost difference between the two groups using a healthcare or societal perspective decreased to €936 (95%CI €719 to €1153) or €1671 per patient (95%CI €952 to €2390), respectively. The mean QALY difference increased to 0.05 per patient (95%CI - 0.03 to 0.14). Incremental costs per QALY gained from a healthcare or societal perspective became €17,374 or €31,024, respectively. Analyses of imputed data did not alter our findings. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on the selected perspective, cost-effectiveness threshold, and time horizon, septoplasty has the potential to be cost-effective. Despite considerable uncertainty, septoplasty seems to be cost-effective from a healthcare perspective, after 24 months against a threshold of €20,000 per QALY. From a societal perspective, septoplasty is not yet cost-effective after 24 months, but it comes closer to the cost-effectiveness threshold as time passes by. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register, NTR3868 (https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/3698). Prospectively registered on February 21, 2013.

Septoplasty for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The status of current evidence for the effectiveness of septoplasty is unclear. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of a) septoplasty (with or without concurrent turbinate surgery) versus non-surgical management, and b) septoplasty with concurrent turbinate surgery versus septoplasty alone, for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults. METHODOLOGY: Eligible for inclusion were randomised controlled trials and non-randomised designs comparing treatment strategies. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's tool. Standardised mean differences and risk differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Substantial heterogeneity between included studies did not allow meta-analyses. RESULTS: No studies were found comparing septoplasty (with or without concurrent turbinate surgery) to non-surgical management, but 11 articles were included to compare septoplasty with concurrent turbinate surgery to septoplasty alone. Five studies described both subjective and objective outcomes; six studies reported one or the other. Risk of bias was overall high. Although outcomes generally improved after treatment, eight out of nine studies on subjective measures and five out of seven studies on objective measures found no additional benefit of turbinate surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the routine application of septoplasty in clinical practice, the current body of evidence does not support firm conclusions on its effectiveness.

Clinimetric properties of the Glasgow Health Status Inventory, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow, and 4-Phase Rhinomanometry in adults with nasal obstruction.

BACKGROUND: The validity of many measurement instruments frequently used in rhinology is unknown. This study describes clinimetric properties of well-known subjective and objective outcomes, i.e., the Glasgow Health Status Inventory, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow, and 4-Phase Rhinomanometry, in adults with nasal obstruction. METHODOLOGY: Construct validity and responsiveness were determined in 111 patients. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability were analysed in 30 patients. We assessed content validity by interviewing patients and ENT-surgeons; construct validity by comparing hypothesised associations to calculated correlations between the outcomes; inter-rater reliability by having two researchers perform objective measurements in the same patients; intra-rater reliability by having one rater administer all instruments twice within a two-week interval; and responsiveness by comparing patients scores at baseline and three months after septoplasty or non-surgical management. RESULTS: All instruments demonstrated adequate content validity, inter-, and intra-rater reliability. Analyses of construct validity yielded low Pearsons correlations between the subjective and objective outcomes. Comparing septoplasty to non-surgical management, only the Glasgow Health Status Inventory scores were different between the two groups (mean difference 10.4, 95% CI 6.9 - 13.9). CONCLUSION: All measurement instruments scored appropriately on content validity and reliability, but only the subjective GHSI scored well on responsiveness.

Effectiveness of septoplasty versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Septoplasty, i.e., surgical correction of the deviated nasal septum, is the most common ear, nose and throat (ENT) operation in adults. Currently the main indication to perform septoplasty is nasal obstruction. However, the effectiveness of septoplasty for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated nasal septum remains uncertain. Scientific evidence is scarce and inconclusive, and internationally accepted guidelines are lacking. Moreover, there is no consensus on whether or not septoplasty should be combined with concurrent turbinate surgery. The objective of the current ongoing trial is to study the effectiveness of septoplasty (with or without concurrent turbinate surgery) as compared to non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated nasal septum, both in terms of subjective (health-related quality of life) as well as objective (nasal patency) outcome measures. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is designed as a pragmatic, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. A total of 200 adults will be enrolled with nasal obstruction based on a deviated nasal septum and an indication for septoplasty according to current medical practice in the Netherlands. Participants will be randomized to either septoplasty (with or without concurrent turbinate surgery as originally indicated by the otorhinolaryngologist) or a non-surgical watchful waiting strategy. Follow-up visits will be scheduled at 0, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. During each follow-up visit, health-related quality of life questionnaires will be administered and measurements of four-phase rhinomanometry and peak nasal inspiratory flow will be performed. Costs will be studied using a patient-based diary. Effects of septoplasty on health-related quality of life (primary outcome) and nasal patency will be calculated as mean differences with 95 % confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses according to gender, age, and severity of the septal deviation will be performed. All analyses will be performed on an intention-to-treat basis. DISCUSSION: With the results of this study we aim to contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines regarding indications for septoplasty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register/Dutch Trial Registry ( www.trialregister.nl ), trial identifying number: NTR3868 . Registered on 21 February 2013.