Does Functional Septorhinoplasty Provide Improvement of the Nasal Passage in Validated Patient-Reported Outcome Measures?

Litigation in Septorhinoplasty Surgery: A Pan-Specialty Review of National Health Service (the United Kingdom) Data

Success in septorhinoplasty surgery can be difficult to assess due to a lack of objective and measurable outcomes. If patients' expectations are not met, it places surgeons performing septorhinoplasty at risk of litigation which can be stressful and costly. The National Institute of health (NHS) Resolution is a government-funded organization in the United Kingdom that provides expertise to the NHS on resolving patient concerns. Data were requested from NHS Resolution for claims involving septorhinoplasty surgery over a period of 5 years between April 2015 and April 2020. Rhinoplasty claims performed by all specialties were included. Data included the claim status, incident details, alleged injury, damages claimed, and damages paid. A total of 31 claims were identified by the study, equating to a total cost of £1,347,336.10. Of the 31 claims for rhinoplasty or septorhinoplasty, 9 cases were open (29%, £962,361.00) and 22 cases were closed (71%, £384,975.10). The common causes for claims were "intraoperative problems (32%)," "failure to warn-informed consent (19%)," and "foreign body left in situ (13%)." The most common injuries were "cosmetic disfigurement (39%)," "unnecessary pain (29%)," and "additional/ unnecessary operation (29%)." This study highlights the need for improved awareness of clinical negligence claims among surgeons who perform septorhinoplasty. Results are applicable to all specialties who perform the procedure. The study highlights the importance of assessing patients' motives and expectations prior to surgery and emphasizes the need for a well-documented rigorous consent process.

Effect of alar nasal valve stent on nasal breathing

PURPOSE

Lateral nasal wall insufficiency has previously been a surgical challenge. In 2018, the Alar Nasal Valve Stent (Medtronic) was taken into use at Helsinki University Hospital. The alar cartilages are repositioned and locked into position with the Alar Nasal Valve Stent on the mucosa. The stent gives support and widens the alar valve while cartilages scar into their new position presumably facilitating breathing after removal of the stent. The aim of this prospective, observational study was to investigate whether the Alar Nasal Valve Stent has an effect on nasal breathing in patients with lateral nasal wall insufficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Symptom questionnaires (Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation, five-step symptom score) were analyzed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and peak nasal inspiratory flow were analyzed preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The patients performed a stress ergometry preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively, with their noses being photographed and filmed.

RESULTS

In a series of 18 patients, a significant positive difference was seen in subjective symptom scores preoperatively versus postoperatively. The difference remained stable throughout the follow-up. No difference in objective symptom measurements was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients suffering from lateral nasal wall insufficiency experience a significant subjective improvement in nasal breathing after Alar Nasal Valve Stent surgery.

Effects of Functional Rhinoplasty on Nasal Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Functional rhinoplasty (FRP) is used to improve nasal ventilation by correcting problems with the nasal valves. It has not been systematically reviewed on a large scale.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies evaluating nasal obstruction before and after functional rhinoplasty in patients with nasal valve problems.

RESULTS

A total of 57 cohorts from 43 studies involving 2024 patients were included in the current meta-analysis. The Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores indicated significant improvement in nasal obstruction at the 1-month follow-up (WMD = 38.12; 95% CI, 29.15-47.10; I²= 83.6%; P = 0.00), 3-month follow-up (WMD = 48.40; 95% CI, 43.16-53.64; I²= 69.1%; P = 0.00), 6-month follow-up (WMD = 44.35; 95% CI, 36.65-52.04; I²= 96.6%; P = 0.00), 12-month follow-up (WMD=43.07; 95% CI, 26.56-59.58; I²= 97.9%; P = 0.00), and the last follow-up (WMD = 46.90; 95% CI, 43.92-49.88; I²= 95.9%; P = 0.00) with respect to the preoperative baseline. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores indicated a similar trend at the 1-month follow-up (WMD = 4.68; 95% CI, 3.79-5.57; I²= 86.8%; P = 0.00), 3-month follow-up (WMD = 4.46; 95% CI, 3.19-5.74; I²= 93.3%; P = 0.00), 6-month follow-up (WMD = 4.91; 95% CI, 4.04-5.78; I²= 88%; P = 0.00) and last follow-up (WMD = 4.22; 95% CI, 3.12-5.32; I²= 97.1%; P = 0.00). Nasal obstruction was obviously relieved through rhinomanometry (SMD=0.56; 95% CI, 0.27-0.84; I²= 0.0%; P = 0.00) but not through peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) (SMD=-1.51; 95% CI, -3.10 to 0.07; I²= 98.9%; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

FRP may have a positive effect on nasal obstruction caused by nasal valve problems. Broader and well-designed studies are needed to shed more light on the relationships in this area.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Change in surgeon for revision rhinoplasty: The impact of patient demographics and surgical technique on patient retention

OBJECTIVES

A subset of patients who require revision rhinoplasty will change surgeons for their second procedure. We sought to investigate the rate of surgeon change and identify associated predictors using a population-based, ambulatory surgery database.

METHODS/STUDY DESIGN

In this retrospective review, 9172 rhinoplasty procedures over a 5-year period were analyzed using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Florida State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database (SASD). We identified 380 patients who had at least two rhinoplasty procedures between 2009 and 2014. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of patients changing surgeons for their second documented rhinoplasty.

RESULTS

Among the 380/8531 (4.4%) patients who underwent a revision rhinoplasty, 117/380 (30.8%) patients changed surgeons for their subsequent procedure within a 5-year period. Multivariable logistic regression identified a lower likelihood of surgeon change in patients undergoing functional or cosmetic cartilage grafting procedures (OR 0.342, 95%CI 0.155-0.714, P = .006) and in patients who self-paid for their procedure (OR 0.476, 95%CI 0.225-0.984, P = .048). One hundred twenty-four patients underwent a cosmetic revision rhinoplasty and were twice as likely to change surgeons as those who underwent functional revision rhinoplasty (OR 2.042 95%CI 1.046-4.050, P = .038). Time elapsed (>2 years) was positively correlated with likelihood of surgeon change (OR 1.236, 95%CI 1.153-1.333, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In our analysis, 30.8% of patients changed surgeons for their revision rhinoplasty. Cartilage grafting at the time of index procedure and cash payment correlated with a decreased likelihood of surgeon change. Patients were more likely to change surgeons with increased time elapsed or for an aesthetic revision. Clarifying features associated with surgeon change may help improve patient satisfaction and retention.

Overall quality of life impact on candidates for septorhinoplasty according to the World Health Organization quality of life brief questionnaire (WHOQOL-Brief)

Introduction

Quality of life has been an increasingly reference measure in whole health impact of diseases and in septorhinoplasty evaluation as well. It is known that the decision for this elective surgical procedure requires the subjective perception of patients’ complaints about their own health and life stage in association with the surgeon’s aesthetic and functional perspective of each case.

Objective

To define the quality of life of candidates for septorhinoplasty using the World Health Organization quality of life questionnaire, WHOQOL-Brief, and the prevalence of other independent variables for this population.

Methods

A cross-sectional study using a sample of candidates for septorhinoplasty was performed. All patients responded to the WHOQOL-Brief during the pre-operative period. A normative population quality of life study was the reference for the sample size and means.

Results

A total of 302 patients were included among the 322 eligible patients. Twenty patients did not complete the questionnaire correctly and were excluded from the study. The sample consisted of patients aged between 15 and 78 years (34.7 ± 14 years): the most majority were Caucasian and female. Among this group, 88.1% declared symptoms of nasal obstruction and 77.4% complained of sleeping problems. It was seen that 10.9% patients chose the surgery primarily for aesthetic improvement; 37.1% chose it mainly because of functional symptoms and 52% chose it for both functional and aesthetic reasons. The physical health domain’s mean was 62.2 ± 17), which is a higher mean compared to the references’ standard one (μ = 58.9 ± 10.5, p = 0.002). The social relationship domain mean was 70.8 ± 18.1; that is a lower mean then general population’s one (μ = 76.2 ± 18.8, p < 0.001). The psychological and the environment domain means revealed no difference when comparing the sample to the norm (μ = 65.3 ± 15.1 vs. μ = 65.9 ± 10.8, p = 0.530 and μ = 60.3 ± 13.1 vs. μ = 59.9 ± 14.9, p = 0.667).

Conclusion

The WHOQOL-Brief questionnaire proved an accurate instrument to cross-check different populations in quality of life outcomes. The study provides good evidence of lower quality of life in social relations domain and high prevalence of nasal obstruction and sleeping symptoms in candidates for septorhinoplasty. This study contributes to recent literature with relevant data supporting a more integrative evaluation in this population in the preoperative period. The results may also encourage a multidisciplinary approach for chronic symptoms when associated with nasal obstruction, sleep disorders and aesthetic complaints.

Prospective Qualitative Multidimensional Assessment of the Postoperative Rhinoplasty Experience

Background: Understanding the multidimensional postoperative patient experience after rhinoplasty is critical for preoperative counseling and postoperative management. Methods: A prospective clinical study was conducted from June to December 2019 for 60 patients undergoing cosmetic and/or functional rhinoplasty by two facial plastic surgeons. All patients were administered the brief pain inventory, a clinically validated pain instrument, including multiple quality of life (QOL) domains, survey at postoperative days (PODs) 1, 2, 3, and 8. Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores were used to predict patients having greatest QOL disturbance. Primary outcomes were postoperative QOL domains, pain scores, and oxycodone usage. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14.0 (STATA Corp., College Station, TX). Preoperative NOSE and postoperative Euro Quality of Life 5-Dimension scores were also recorded. Results: Patients showed greatest disruption to QOL in the first 3 PODs and essentially returned to normal levels by POD8, which mirrored trends in pain and opioid usage. All tested QOL domains (general activity, sleep, work, mood, enjoyment, and relationships) were strongly correlated with overall pain. NOSE scores were not significantly associated with pain or QOL impairment. Conclusions: This is the first study to prospectively evaluate the rhinoplasty patient's postoperative experience using a pain instrument, including multiple QOL domains. Utilizing a validated clinical instrument allows for standardized comparison of postrhinoplasty pain and QOL disruption with other surgical procedures and disease processes. These data may help guide preoperative counseling and set accurate patient expectations for the postoperative period.

A national survey of functional septorhinoplasty surgery performed in the United Kingdom: a clinician end-user questionnaire to assess current practice and help inform future practice

PURPOSE

The aim of this national survey is to assess the current practice of functional septorhinoplasty (SRP) surgery in the UK and better inform future practice.

METHODS

An ENT-UK approved questionnaire was sent out to all 135 consultant members of the British Society of Facial Plastic Surgery (BSFPS). Data was collected on numbers of functional SRPs performed on the NHS, use of outcome measures, psychology and photography support, antibiotic use, referral base and consenting practice.

RESULTS

The response rate was 38.5%, with 52 out of 135 completed. The median number of annual SRP cases per surgeon was 40. Most surgeons (95%) used clinical photography as an outcome measure. However, 27% of the respondents use a subjective outcome measurement and 3% of them use an objective outcome measurement. Only 34% had access to psychology support and 60% receive their referrals from primary care. All surgeons counsel patients for aesthetic change, 15% mention CSF leak and 38% mention olfactory disturbance. The key comment from our respondents was to relabel the rhinoplasty procedure as a functional SRP procedure with the aim to remove it from the Procedures of Limited Clinical Value (PoLCV) list.

CONCLUSION

The majority of our respondents perform a large proportion of the SRP surgeries in the UK with each of the respondents performing an average of 40 SRP surgeries per year. There is a need to recatergorise functional septorhinoplasty as a functional operation and recommend functional SRP surgery to be removed from the PoLCV list.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Improving Nasal Form and Function after Rhinoplasty

Objective Rhinoplasty, a surgical procedure that alters the shape or appearance of the nose while preserving or enhancing the nasal airway, ranks among the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures in the United States, with >200,000 procedures reported in 2014. While it is difficult to calculate the exact economic burden incurred by rhinoplasty patients following surgery with or without complications, the average rhinoplasty procedure typically exceeds $4000. The costs incurred due to complications, infections, or revision surgery may include the cost of long-term antibiotics, hospitalization, or lost revenue from hours/days of missed work. The resultant psychological impact of rhinoplasty can also be significant. Furthermore, the health care burden from psychological pressures of nasal deformities/aesthetic shortcomings, surgical infections, surgical pain, side effects from antibiotics, and nasal packing materials must also be considered for these patients. Prior to this guideline, limited literature existed on standard care considerations for pre- and postsurgical management and for standard surgical practice to ensure optimal outcomes for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. The impetus for this guideline is to utilize current evidence-based medicine practices and data to build unanimity regarding the peri- and postoperative strategies to maximize patient safety and to optimize surgical results for patients. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians who either perform rhinoplasty or are involved in the care of a rhinoplasty candidate, as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The target audience is any clinician or individual, in any setting, involved in the management of these patients. The target patient population is all patients aged ≥15 years. The guideline is intended to focus on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with this surgical procedure; it is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Recommendations in this guideline concerning education and counseling to the patient are also intended to include the caregiver if the patient is <18 years of age. Action Statements The Guideline Development Group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should ask all patients seeking rhinoplasty about their motivations for surgery and their expectations for outcomes, should provide feedback on whether those expectations are a realistic goal of surgery, and should document this discussion in the medical record. (2) Clinicians should assess rhinoplasty candidates for comorbid conditions that could modify or contraindicate surgery, including obstructive sleep apnea, body dysmorphic disorder, bleeding disorders, or chronic use of topical vasoconstrictive intranasal drugs. (3) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should evaluate the rhinoplasty candidate for nasal airway obstruction during the preoperative assessment. (4) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty candidates regarding what to expect after surgery, how surgery might affect the ability to breathe through the nose, potential complications of surgery, and the possible need for future nasal surgery. (5) The clinician, or the clinician's designee, should counsel rhinoplasty candidates with documented obstructive sleep apnea about the impact of surgery on nasal airway obstruction and how obstructive sleep apnea might affect perioperative management. (6) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty patients before surgery about strategies to manage discomfort after surgery. (7) Clinicians should document patients' satisfaction with their nasal appearance and with their nasal function at a minimum of 12 months after rhinoplasty. The Guideline Development Group made recommendations against certain actions: (1) When a surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, chooses to administer perioperative antibiotics for rhinoplasty, he or she should not routinely prescribe antibiotic therapy for a duration >24 hours after surgery. (2) Surgeons should not routinely place packing in the nasal cavity of rhinoplasty patients (with or without septoplasty) at the conclusion of surgery. The panel group made the following statement an option: (1) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, may administer perioperative systemic steroids to the rhinoplasty patient.