Endonasal Septoplasty Using a Septal Cartilaginous Batten Graft for Managing Caudal Septal Deviation.

Caudal nasal septal deviation is an important condition altering nasal obstruction and cosmetic appearance and many surgical techniques have been published on how to correct caudal septal deviation, as successful management of caudal septal deviation is challenging. The goal of our study was to explore the effect of endonasal septoplasty using a septal cartilaginous batten graft for managing caudal septal deviation. We tested 26 participants with caudal septal deviation who received endonasal septoplasty using a septal cartilaginous batten graft from 1 April 2019 to 29 June 2022, and followed up for at least 6 months. Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale and visual analog scale (VAS) were recorded at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months after surgery. Valid samples were analyzed by repeated measures ANOVA and paired sample t-test. Average participant age was 36.15 ± 11.02 years old. The preoperative, 1-month postoperative, and 6-month postoperative NOSE scale decreased significantly (75.38 ± 15.62, 13.85 ± 7.79, and 14.04 ± 9.90; p < 0.001), while preoperative, 1-month postoperative, and 6-month postoperative VAS (convex/concave side) also improved (7.50 ± 0.81/3.38 ± 0.94, 2.27 ± 0.53/1.54 ± 0.58, and 2.31 ± 0.55/1.58 ± 0.58; p < 0.001). Our results showed that endonasal septoplasty using a septal cartilaginous batten graft had good surgical outcomes without an open scar or severe complications.

Outcomes of Endonasal Septoplasty and Extracorporeal Septal Reconstruction in Anterocaudal Septal Deviation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the functional and aesthetic outcomes of endonasal septoplasty (ES) and extracorporeal septal reconstruction (ESR) in anterocaudal septal deviation. METHODS: In this study, patients (n = 46) who underwent nasal septoplasty surgery due to anterocaudal septal deviation during February 2015 to August 2017 were analyzed; 23 patients underwent ES and the others (n = 23) underwent ESR. The decision of whether to use the ES or ESR was randomized by random number table method. Nasal obstruction symptoms evaluation (NOSE) scores, total nasal resistance (TNR), aesthetic visual analog scale (VAS), nasal anatomical angles, and incidence of complications were used to assess the patients in 2 groups. RESULTS: The NOSE scores, TNR, aesthetic VAS, tip deviation angle (TDA), nasolabial angle (NLA), nasofrontal angle (NFA) in the ESR group were significantly improved from preoperative to postoperative 1 year, whereas in the ES group, except aesthetic VAS, NLA, NFA, all other postoperative outcomes were improved from preoperative values. The objective and subjective postoperative results of ESR group were better than the ES group except TDA. The incidence of complications was not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Our study have compared the nasal functional and aesthetic outcomes of 2 septoplasty techniques in a randomized controlled trial. The ESR technique is more effective than ES technique in correcting functional and aesthetic disorders caused by anterocaudal septal deviation.

Effectiveness of modified cutting and suture technique for endonasal caudal septoplasty in correcting nasal obstruction and preventing nasal tip projection loss.

PURPOSE: Caudal septoplasty is a difficult procedure. The cutting and suture technique is suitable for caudal septoplasty, but a batten graft is always necessary and bears the risk of nasal tip projection loss. We established a modified cutting and suture technique (MCAST), without using a batten graft, and investigated its effectiveness in correcting nasal obstruction and preventing nasal tip projection loss. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 22 patients who underwent caudal septoplasty using MCAST. Subjective assessment by Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score and objective assessment by computed tomography (CT) were performed before and after the surgery. For evaluating nasal tip projection, we asked patients about their awareness of external nasal deformity. Additionally, the nasal tip projection was measured by CT and compared before and after surgery. RESULTS: The median preoperative NOSE score reduced significantly after MCAST (P < 0.001). On CT, the ratio of the area of the convex side to that of the concave side in the anterior portion of the nasal cavity increased significantly after MCAST (P < 0.001). All patients were unaware of external nasal deformity. There were no significant differences in the mean preoperative and postoperative nasal tip height and nasolabial angle. The mean supra tip height was significantly greater postoperatively than preoperatively (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The MCAST was useful for correcting nasal obstruction with caudal septal deviation. There was no postoperative loss of nasal tip projection. The MCAST can be suitable for correcting C-shaped caudal deviations without dislocating the caudal septum from the anterior nasal septum.