A comparative study of efficacy and outcomes of endoscopic versus conventional technique in septoturbinoplasty

Abstract

Background: Septal deviation is a very common clinical entity which often affects nasal aesthetics and functionality requiring surgical correction. With the advent of rigid endoscopy, newer techniques of endoscopic surgery have come into place that are replacing conventional methods. The aim of the study was to compare the two septoturbinoplasty procedures (endoscopic and conventional) using both objective and subjective data and thereby determine the advantages an endoscope provides during nasal septal surgery. Methods: It is a prospective comparative study of 56 patients out of which 28 patients underwent endoscopic septoturbinoplasty and the remaining 28 underwent conventional septoturbinoplasty. Outcomes measured were improvement of nasal symptoms following the surgery based on subjective questionnaire data collected, operation time and post-operative complications. Results: The mean NOSE questionnaire scores pre-operatively were 67.32±12.4 for the conventional group and 64.64±14.9 for the endoscopic group. The post-operative scores were 6.43±7.2 for the conventional group and 4.64±6.8 for the endoscopic group. Similarly, the operative time as well as the rate of post-operative complications were lesser in the endoscopic technique compared to the conventional technique. Conclusions: Both conventional and endoscopic techniques are effective in correcting the septal deviation as proved by significant subjective improvement in patient symptom scores post-surgery. The use of an endoscope, on the other hand, results in a shorter operation time and a lower complication rate after surgery.