xRead - Nasal Obstruction (September 2024) Full Articles

wt i vi tehainnas luyfsf iisc .i eAnl tthi on uf ogrhmtahtei osnt uodny lba yt e Er ag la nn aasna dl wKai ml l r e pi naci rl u, 1d0e ds t1u dpiaetsi ewn et rwe i ti nh ccl uo dmepdo isni t tehger qa fut arnetpi taai‐r fnoars aulnvi laal tveer ai nl snuaf sf iacli es nt ecnyoasni sd, idt yanl saomi inc c sl uu dp er da - 6a l apra tl iaet ne trsa lwwi tahl l ncaosl al al pvsael vwe hc oo l ul anpds ee r dwueen tt of ui nn tcet ri onna al l rc ho imn op pu ltai ns gt yt hwei tehf fpelcatc se imz ee. nAt sosf haol awr nb iant tTeanbgl er a1f ,t so. f Ht he en c1e0, iitnwc lausd ceodnsstiudde ireesd, 7r ewl eevraenct oanndduicnt celdu di ne dt hien Us tnuidt ei eds Swt aetrees ,p2r oi ns pAeucst itvr ea l ai an, da n2dw1e irne Cr ea tnraodsap. eAc ltli vt eh .eSianmc lpu ldeesdi zsetsu dr ai ensg we de rf er oomb s6e rt ov a7t i9o np aa lt.i eEni gt sh. tS i x studies included revision surgery. Six of 10 studies reported baseline NOSE scores rsaanmgpinlegifnrcolumd5ed5.032to4 8p6ar.5ticpiopianntsts, iinndtiocatatiln. g severe or extreme nasal obstruction. The pooled study Ti nh Teamb laei n2 .r Te hs ue l tssa mr eep oi nrftoe rdmbayt itohne iisn cplruedseedn tsetdu di ni e gs rwa pe hr ei ccaol nf ovremr t ei nd Fi ni guunr ief i 2e d. Tfho er me f faencdt spi rzee ss evnatreide d f( rBoamr h−a 2m1 et to a−l ,6 0 Ppaol ei nstys eotna tl ,h e aNnOdS EYesucna gl e eat nadl w)e. rWe hs et ant ics ot imc abl liyn isni gg ntihf iec adnatt ai na ac lrlobsus ta3l l s1t0u ds iteusd i e s a(Fnidgufrroem3)a, lwl aitvhahilaigbhlehteimteeropgoeinnetsit,yth(e pooled effect size was −47.7 (95% CI, −53.4 to −42.1) points I = 72%) and no need for trim-and-fill correction with an Egger coefficient of 0.67 (95% CI, −1.81 to 3.18; P = .54). The sensitivity test was conducted exclud‐ i(n−g4 7t h. 7e ps toui nd tys b[ y9 5E%g a Cn I a, −n 5d 4K. 0i mt o. − 4I n1 .t4h aptoci na st se], )t hwehpe on ocloe md be si nt iimn ga tael l rtehme arienpeeda et esds emn teiaa sl luy rtehse. s a m e CCoI, m−4b7in.8intgo t−h4e2s.h2oprot-itnetrsm]) fbiguut rweisth(≤lo3wmhoenttehrso)g, ethneeiptyoo( led effect was similar (−45.0 points [95% I = 0%) (eFigure 1 in the Supplement). For mpoidin-ttes)rmwiftohlllooww-uhpet(e>r3ogteon6eimtyo(nths), the pooled effect was −48.4 points (95% CI, −52.5 to −44.4 I = 0%) (eFigure 2 in the Supplement). The pooled effect ob‐ sweirthvehdiginh ahelotenrgo-gteernmeitfyol(low-up (>6 months) was −49.0 points (95% CI, −62.1 to −35.8 points) I = 93%) (eFigure 3 in the Supplement). The lower limit of all the calcu‐ lma tael dd pe toeoc lteadb leef fcehcat nsgi zee, s aenx dc egerdesa 1t e9r. 4t hpaoni nt wt s i, cae pt hr eevMi oCuIsDl y f os ur gNg Oe sStEe ds cNo Or eSsE i ns cdoi cr ae t li en vg eal fsourc ca ems si fnui ‐l sfourrgaictrailmo-uatncodm-fiell. coTrrheectriiosnk.of publication bias was insignificant for all 4 analyses, with no need Discussion Ipna ttiheins tss y, st ht eemNaOt iScEr es cvoi erwe sasnhdo mw ee dt a s- ai gnnailfyi cs ai sn ot fo 1v e0r oa lbl si me rpv raot ivoenma le snttuadfiteesr al antde rpaol onlaesda ls awma lpl lreeopfa 3i r2. 4 Tu hr ees r. eTshuel tcsawl ceurl ae t seidmpi loa or lwe dh eenf f epcot osliiznegs esfuf egcgtessitzeeds tfhoart sfha ov or tr-a, bml ei dr-e, as un ldt sl oonf gt h- tee rrme pfaoi lrl oawr e- uapl sfoi gs‐e e n mreopraeirthwainthhoaulftcaoymeeasr blaatseer.dTohnisNmOeStEa-sacnoarleyscishainncgleusd. ed o nly studies evaluating lateral nasal wall Limitations 16 4,16,18,21,22,24 17 20 25 2 16 2 2 2 15 9 Repair of the Lateral Nasal Wall in Nasal Airway Obstruction - PMC

7/1/24, 9:49 AM

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5876913/?report=printable

7/15