Literature DB >> 23728068

Costal cartilage is a superior implant material than conchal cartilage in the treatment of empty nose syndrome.

Jae Hoon Jung1, Mohammad Ariff Baguindali, Jin Taek Park, Yong Ju Jang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of endonasal microplasty in treating empty nose syndrome by comparing the use of costal and conchal cartilage implants to construct neoturbinates. STUDY
DESIGN: Case series with chart review.
SETTING: Tertiary referral center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 31 patients who were diagnosed with empty nose syndrome and underwent endonasal microplasty with conchal cartilage (n = 17) or costal cartilage implants (n = 14) were included. Each patient's clinico-demographic profile was reviewed to compare the conchal cartilage group and the costal cartilage groups. Pre- and postoperative Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-25) scores were also compared.
RESULTS: Both groups showed a significant improvement in SNOT-25 scores following surgery (P < .05). The group who received costal cartilage implants demonstrated more significant improvements than the conchal cartilage group in terms of the mean difference between pre- and postoperative SNOT-25 scores (P = .023). Symptom outcomes related to depression demonstrated significant improvements in the conchal cartilage group (P < .05), while in the costal cartilage group, in addition to these 3 variables, 7 items related to functional problems also demonstrated significant improvements (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Costal cartilage is a more useful material than conchal cartilage as implants for the treatment of empty nose syndrome patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sino-Nasal Outcome Test; autologous; conchal cartilage; costal cartilage; empty nose syndrome; endonasal microplasty; homologous; neoturbinate; turbinectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23728068     DOI: 10.1177/0194599813491223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 0194-5998            Impact factor:   3.497


  3 in total

Review 1.  Empty nose syndrome.

Authors:  Edward C Kuan; Jeffrey D Suh; Marilene B Wang
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  Assessment of postsurgical outcomes between different implants in patients with empty nose syndrome: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zu-Xia Ma; Guo-Hua Hu
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 1.671

3.  Efficacy and Safety of Autologous Stromal Vascular Fraction in the Treatment of Empty Nose Syndrome.

Authors:  Do-Youn Kim; Hye Ran Hong; Eun Wook Choi; Sang Won Yoon; Yong Ju Jang
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 3.372

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.