Luciana Carolina Peruzzo Kokubo1, Thiago Bittencourt Ottoni Carvalho2, Marco Aurélio Fornazieri3,4, Eduardo Monteiro de Castro Gomes5, Cláudia Maggy Faulstich Alves2, André Luiz Lopes Sampaio2. 1. Hospital Universitário de Brasília, University of Brasília School of Medicine, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Brasília, Distrito Federal, 70910900, Brazil. luciana.c.peruzzo@gmail.com. 2. Hospital Universitário de Brasília, University of Brasília School of Medicine, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Brasília, Distrito Federal, 70910900, Brazil. 3. Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil. 4. Department of Surgery, Londrina State University, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil. 5. Statistical Department, University of Brasília, Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess whether significant changes in smell perception occur after septorhinoplasty, and evaluate whether septum deviation, allergic rhinitis, and surgical technique affect postoperative smell perception. METHODS: Thirty-four patients (> 18 years old) awaiting septorhinoplasty were included, while those with previous severe hyposmia or anosmia were excluded. The participants self-assessed their smell perception using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), where 0 mm indicated the inability to smell and 100 mm indicated normal smell perception. The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) was applied before the procedure, and 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: The UPSIT score showed no significant changes at 4 (p = 0.59; 95% CI - 0.35 to + 2) or 12 weeks (p = 0.16; 95% CI - 1.13 to + 0.66). A comparison of the VAS scores before and 4 weeks after surgery (p = 0.62; 95% CI - 0.63 to + 0.39) yielded similar results. However, the average VAS scores improved 12 weeks after surgery (p = 0.007; 95% CI + 0.22 to + 1.30). Olfactory function, measured using the UPSIT, was not influenced by open or closed surgical techniques (p ≥ 0.10), the presence or absence of rhinitis (p ≥ 0.15), or obstructive septum deviation (p ≥ 0.38). Twelve weeks after surgery, self-evaluated smell perception was better in patients who underwent a closed procedure rather than an open procedure (p = 0.006; 95% CI: -1.39 to -0.37). CONCLUSION: A validated test demonstrates that septorhinoplasty does not compromise smell perception 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. However, it might improve smell perception by the self-report observation.
PURPOSE: To assess whether significant changes in smell perception occur after septorhinoplasty, and evaluate whether septum deviation, allergic rhinitis, and surgical technique affect postoperative smell perception. METHODS: Thirty-four patients (> 18 years old) awaiting septorhinoplasty were included, while those with previous severe hyposmia or anosmia were excluded. The participants self-assessed their smell perception using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), where 0 mm indicated the inability to smell and 100 mm indicated normal smell perception. The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) was applied before the procedure, and 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: The UPSIT score showed no significant changes at 4 (p = 0.59; 95% CI - 0.35 to + 2) or 12 weeks (p = 0.16; 95% CI - 1.13 to + 0.66). A comparison of the VAS scores before and 4 weeks after surgery (p = 0.62; 95% CI - 0.63 to + 0.39) yielded similar results. However, the average VAS scores improved 12 weeks after surgery (p = 0.007; 95% CI + 0.22 to + 1.30). Olfactory function, measured using the UPSIT, was not influenced by open or closed surgical techniques (p ≥ 0.10), the presence or absence of rhinitis (p ≥ 0.15), or obstructive septum deviation (p ≥ 0.38). Twelve weeks after surgery, self-evaluated smell perception was better in patients who underwent a closed procedure rather than an open procedure (p = 0.006; 95% CI: -1.39 to -0.37). CONCLUSION: A validated test demonstrates that septorhinoplasty does not compromise smell perception 4 and 12 weeks after surgery. However, it might improve smell perception by the self-report observation.
Authors: Marco Aurélio Fornazieri; Clayson Alan dos Santos; Thiago Freire Pinto Bezerra; Fábio de Rezende Pinna; Richard Louis Voegels; Richard L Doty Journal: Chem Senses Date: 2014-12-29 Impact factor: 3.160