Advertisement

Cosmetic and Functional Outcomes of Septorhinoplasty

  • V. Sasindran
  • B. HarikrishanEmail author
  • N. Mathew
Original Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

To find out the improvement in cosmetic and functional aspects as measured using Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire following Septorhinoplasty. To measure the increase in nasal airflow as measured using “Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow meter” in patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty. Design: prospective cohort study. Settings: patients with complaints of nasal obstruction and external deformity who are undergoing Septorhinoplasty after evaluation. Subjects: patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty at Pushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Thiruvalla during a period of 1½ years, starting from 01/01/2017. Methods: non-random, consecutive sampling. The mean age in this study is 26.10 years. The most common age group of patients who were included in the study was 11–20 years. We had 11 females and 8 males. Female to male ratio was 1.375. The mean duration of symptom was 6.33 years. Most of the patients in our study were students. The mean pre-op ROE score was 29.79 ± 15.28 and post-op score was 87.32 ± 8.75. There was significant improvement in ROE scores following Septorhinoplasty (p < 0.0001). The mean pre-op PNIF score was 76.58 ± 41.37 and post-op score was 125 ± 50.22. There was significant improvement in PNIF scores following surgery (p < 0.0001). There is significant improvement in cosmetic and functional aspects in patients undergoing Septorhinoplasty. There is significant improvement in external appearance and nasal obstruction following Septorhinoplasty. The patient satisfaction following Septorhinoplasty can be measured with ease with the help of Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire and Peak nasal inspiratory flow meter.

Keywords

Septorhinoplasty Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire Peak nasal inspiratory flow Cosmetic aspect Functional aspect 

Notes

Funding

No funding was received by any of the authors for this study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Van Cauwenberge P, Sys L, De Belder T, Watelet J-B (2004) Anatomy and physiology of the nose and the paranasal sinuses. Immunol Allergy Clin N Am 24(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Başer E, Kocagöz GD, Çalim ÖF, Verim A, Yilmaz F, Özturan O (2016) Assessment of patient satisfaction with evaluation methods in open technique septorhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 27(2):420–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eisenberg I (1982) A history of rhinoplasty. S Afr Med J 62(9):286–292PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yalamanchili H, Sclafani A, Schaefer S, Presti P (2008) The path of nasal reconstruction: from ancient india to the present. Facial Plast Surg 24(1):003–010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mazzola R (2007) Reconstruction of the nose: a historical review. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 39(3):181–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mazzola I, Mazzola R (2014) History of reconstructive rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 30(03):227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shiffman MA (2013) Primary rhinoplasty. In: Advanced aesthetic rhinoplasty: art, science and new clinical techniques. Springer, Berlin, pp 133–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodman WS, Charbonneau PA (1974) External approach to rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 84(12):2195–2201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson JR, Johnson CM, Adamson P (1982) Open rhinoplasty: an assessment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 90(2):272–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wähmann MS, Bulut OC, Bran GM, Veit JA, Riedel F (2018) Systematic review of quality-of-life measurement after aesthetic rhinoplasty. Aesthe Plast Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1199-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alsarraf R (2000) Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthet Plast Surg 24(3):192–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barone M, Cogliandro A, Di Stefano N, Tambone V, Persichetti P (2017) A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after rhinoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274(4):1807–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strazdins E, Nie YF, Ramli R, Palesy T, Christensen JM, Alvarado R et al (2018) Association between mental health status and patient satisfaction with the functional outcomes of rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 20(4):284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RSL (2011) Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77(4):510–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Faidiga GB, Carenzi LR, Yassuda CC, Silveira F, do Lago T, Leite MGJ et al (2010) Avaliação tardia em rinoplastia estética em um centro acadêmico de referência. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 76(4):437–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saleh AM, Younes A, Friedman O (2012) Cosmetics and function: quality-of-life changes after rhinoplasty surgery. Laryngoscope 122(2):254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chavan RP, Ingole SM, Birajdar SN (2017) Assessment of surgical outcomes of septorhinoplasty patients: a clinical study. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 3(2):268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Timperley D, Srubisky A, Stow N, Marcells GN, Harvey RJ (2010) Minimal clinically important differences in nasal peak inspiratory flow. Int Rhinol Soc 31:37–40Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fuller JC, Bernstein CH, Levesque PA, Lindsay RW (2018) Peak nasal inspiratory flow as an objective measure of nasal obstruction and functional septorhinoplasty outcomes. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 20(2):175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Teixeira RUF, Zappelini CEM, Alves FS, da Costa EA (2011) Peak nasal inspiratory flow evaluation as an objective method of measuring nasal airflow. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77(4):473–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ENTPushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences and Research CentreThiruvallaIndia

Personalised recommendations