Premium
Surgical outcome for empty nose syndrome: Impact of implantation site
Author(s) -
Lee TaJen,
Fu ChiaHsiang,
Wu ChingLung,
Lee YiChan,
Huang ChiChe,
Chang PoHung,
Chen YiWei,
Tseng HsiaoJung
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
the laryngoscope
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1531-4995
pISSN - 0023-852X
DOI - 10.1002/lary.26769
Subject(s) - medicine , nose , surgery , beck depression inventory , implant , lateral wall , retrospective cohort study , anxiety , mechanical engineering , psychiatry , engineering
Objective/Hypothesis Endonasal submucosal implantation has been confirmed to be beneficial for patients with empty nose syndrome (ENS). However, the optimal implantation site has not been defined. This study aimed to evaluate whether lateral nasal wall implantation is superior to inferior nasal wall implantation in terms of clinical benefits and improvements in quality of life. Study Design Retrospective study in a tertiary medical center. Methods Consecutive ENS patients between 2010 and 2015 with operative histories of inferior turbinectomies and indicated for surgical implantation were enrolled, with at least 1‐year follow‐up. Patients were divided into lateral and inferior nasal wall groups. SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT)‐22, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)‐II, and Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) were applied before and 1 year after implantation. Results Of the total 30 ENS patients analyzed, 14 were in the inferior nasal wall group and 16 were in the lateral nasal wall group. There were no significant intergroup differences in demographic data and preoperative SNOT‐22, BDI‐II, and BAI scores. Postoperative assessment revealed that the lateral nasal wall group had significantly better SNOT‐22 score improvements than the inferior nasal wall group, particularly regarding rhinological symptoms and sleep function. Conclusion Lateral nasal wall implantation may provide significantly better clinical outcomes than inferior nasal wall implantation, and thus may be the preferred, more optimal site for implant placement in ENS patients. Level of Evidence 4. Laryngoscope , 128:554–559, 2018