Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T13:28:50.870Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of nasal and olfactory functions between two surgical approaches for the treatment of concha bullosa: a randomised clinical trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2019

C Andaloro*
Affiliation:
ENT Unit, Santa Marta e Santa Venera Hospital, Acireale, Catania, Italy
I La Mantia
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Sciences, Surgical and Advanced Technologies ‘G.F. Ingrassia’, University of Catania, Italy
V Castro
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Sciences, Surgical and Advanced Technologies ‘G.F. Ingrassia’, University of Catania, Italy
C Grillo
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Sciences, Surgical and Advanced Technologies ‘G.F. Ingrassia’, University of Catania, Italy
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Claudio Andaloro, ENT Unit, Santa Marta e Santa Venera Hospital, 95123 Acireale, Catania, Italy E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +39 516 742 409

Abstract

Objective

Concha bullosa may be associated with paranasal sinus infections and nasal obstruction. Middle concha mucosa membranes have olfactory neurofibrils. This study investigated the impact of routinely used concha bullosa surgery techniques – crushing and lateral laminectomy – on nasal and olfactory functions.

Methods

Forty-three adult patients who had undergone surgery for a symptomatic concha bullosa completed the odour test, nasal obstruction visual analogue scale, 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test, and peak nasal inspiratory flow test, pre-operatively and three months post-operatively. The pre- and post-operative results within and between the two treatment groups were compared.

Results

Intragroup comparison of mean pre- versus post-treatment changes revealed statistically significant findings for the nasal obstruction visual analogue scale, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test, peak nasal inspiratory flow and olfaction tests (all p < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant changes when comparing the scores between the groups (intergroup comparison).

Conclusion

Lateral laminectomy and crushing in concha bullosa surgery have no negative effects on olfactory function. Concha bullosa surgery provides positive outcomes regarding nasal complaints in symptomatic patients.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr C Andaloro takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1Ahmed, EA, Hanci, D, Üstün, O, Aydogdu, I, Özdemir, E, Karaketir, S et al. Surgical techniques for the treatment of concha bullosa: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Open J 2018;4:914Google Scholar
2Lothrop, HA. The anatomy of the inferior ethmoidal turbinate bone with particular reference to cell formation: surgical importance of such ethmoid cells. Ann Surg 1903;38:233–55Google Scholar
3La Mantia, I, Grillo, C, Andaloro, C. Rhinogenic contact point headache: surgical treatment versus medical treatment. J Craniofac Surg 2017;29:228–30Google Scholar
4Subramanian, S, Lekhraj Rampal, GR, Wong, EF, Mastura, S, Razi, A. Concha bullosa in chronic sinusitis. Med J Malaysia 2005;60:535–9Google Scholar
5Stallman, JS, Lobo, JN, Som, PM. The incidence of concha bullosa and its relationship to nasal septal deviation and paranasal sinus disease. Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:1613–18Google Scholar
6Jones, NS, Strobl, A, Holland, I. A study of the CT findings in 100 patients with rhinosinusitis and 100 controls. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1997;22:4751Google Scholar
7Apuhan, T, Yildirim, YS, Simsek, T, Yılmaz, F, Yılmaz, F. Concha bullosa surgery and the distribution of human olfactory neuroepithelium. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2013;270:953–7Google Scholar
8Féron, F, Perry, C, McGrath, JJ, Mackay-Sim, A. New techniques for biopsy and culture of human olfactory epithelial neurons. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;124:861–6Google Scholar
9Nibu, K, Li, G, Zhang, X, Rawson, NE, Restrepo, D, Kaga, K et al. Olfactory neuron-specific expression of NeuroD in mouse and human nasal mucosa. Cell Tissue Res 1999;298:405–14Google Scholar
10Bhatt, NJ. Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: New Horizons. London: Singular Publishing Group, 1997Google Scholar
11Biedlingmaier, J. Endoscopic sinus surgery with middle turbinate resection: results and complications. Ear Nose Throat J 1993;72:351–5Google Scholar
12Richtsmeier, WJ, Cannon, CR. Endoscopic management of concha bullosa. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;110:449–54Google Scholar
13Ciprandi, G, Mora, F, Cassano, M, Gallina, AM, Mora, R. Visual analog scale (VAS) and nasal obstruction in persistent allergic rhinitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;141:527–9Google Scholar
14Mozzanica, F, Preti, A, Gera, R, Gallo, S, Bulgheroni, C, Bandi, F et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the SNOT-22 into Italian. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:887–95Google Scholar
15La Mantia, I, Cupido, F, Castro, V, Andaloro, C. Olfactory function in chronic rhinitis subtypes: any differences? Acta Med Mediterr 2018;34:525–9Google Scholar
16Haehner, A, Mayer, AM, Landis, BN, Pournaras, I, Lill, K, Gudziol, V et al. High test-retest reliability of the extended version of the “Sniffin' Sticks” test. Chem Senses 2009;34:705–11Google Scholar
17Oleszkiewicz, A, Schriver, VA, Croy, I, Hähner, A, Hummel, T. Updated Sniffin’ Sticks normative data based on an extended sample of 9139 subjects. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019;276:719–28Google Scholar
18Say, P, Leopold, D, Cochran, G, Smith, L, Greiner, T. Resection of the inferior superior turbinate: does it affect olfactory ability or contain olfactory neuronal tissue? Am J Rhinol Allergy 2004;18:157–60Google Scholar
19Ishimaru, T, Scheibe, M, Gudziol, V, Negoias, S. Recordings of the optical intrinsic signal from the middle turbinate in response to olfactory and trigeminal stimulation: a pilot study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2008;265:781–5Google Scholar
20Leopold, DA, Hummel, T, Schwob, JE, Hong, SC, Knecht, M, Kobal, G. Anterior distribution of human olfactory epithelium. Laryngoscope 2000;110:417–21Google Scholar
21Rawson, NE, Gomez, G, Cowart, B, Restrepo, D. The use of olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) from biopsies to study changes in aging and neurodegenerative diseases. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1998;855:701–7Google Scholar
22Cannon, CR. Endoscopic management of concha bullosa. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;110:449–54Google Scholar
23Christmas, DA Jr, Merrell, RA Jr, Mirante, JP, Yanagisawa, E. Pneumatized inferior turbinate: report of three cases. Ear Nose Throat J 2004;83:152–4Google Scholar
24Yasar, H, Verim, A, Özkul, H. Bilateral massive conchae bullosa mimicking intranasal tumors. Ear Nose Throat J 2005;84:510–12Google Scholar
25Derin, S, Sahan, M, Deveer, M, Erdogan, S, Tetiker, H, Koseoglu, S. The causes of persistent and recurrent nasal obstruction after primary septoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2016;27:828–30Google Scholar
26Ozlugedik, S, Nakiboglu, G, Sert, C, Elhan, A, Tonuk, E, Akyar, S et al. Numerical study of the aerodynamic effects of septoplasty and partial lateral turbinectomy. Laryngoscope 2008;118:330–4Google Scholar
27Bolger, WE, Parsons, DS, Butzin, CA. Paranasal sinus bony anatomic variations and mucosal abnormalities: CT analysis for endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope 1991;101:5664Google Scholar
28Okuyucu, Ş, Akoğlu, E, Dağlı, AŞ. Concha bullosa pyocele. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2008;265:373–5Google Scholar
29Dutton, JM, Hinton, MJ. Middle turbinate suture conchopexy during endoscopic sinus surgery does not impair olfaction. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2011;25:125–7Google Scholar
30Friedman, M, Tanyeri, H, Landsberg, R, Caldarelli, D. Effects of middle turbinate medialization on olfaction. Laryngoscope 1999;109:1442–5Google Scholar
31Kumral, TL, Yıldırım, G, Çakır, O, Ataç, E, Berkiten, G, Saltürk, Z et al. Comparison of two partial middle turbinectomy techniques for the treatment of a concha bullosa. Laryngoscope 2015;125:1062–6Google Scholar
32de Dorlodot, C, Horoi, M, Lefebvre, P, Collet, S, Bertrand, B, Eloy, P et al. French adaptation and validation of the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22: a prospective cohort study on quality of life among 422 subjects. Clin Otolaryngol 2015;40:2935Google Scholar
33Youlten, L. The peak nasal inspiratory flow meter: a new instrument for the assessment of the response to immunotherapy in seasonal allergic rhinitis. Allergol Immunopathol 1980;8:344Google Scholar
34Ozkul, HM, Balikci, HH, Gurdal, MM, Celebi, S, Yasar, H, Karakas, M et al. Normal range of peak nasal inspiratory flow and its role in nasal septal surgery. J Craniofacial Surg 2013;24:900–2Google Scholar
35Bermüller, C, Kirsche, H, Rettinger, G, Riechelmann, H. Diagnostic accuracy of peak nasal inspiratory flow and rhinomanometry in functional rhinosurgery. Laryngoscope 2008;118:605–10Google Scholar
36Nease, CJ, Krempl, GA. Radiofrequency treatment of turbinate hypertrophy: a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:291–9Google Scholar
37Damm, M, Vent, J, Schmidt, M, Theissen, P, Eckel, HE, Lötsch, J et al. Intranasal volume and olfactory function. Chem Senses 2002;27:831–9Google Scholar
38Leopold, DA. The relationship between nasal anatomy and human olfaction. Laryngoscope 1988;98:1232–8Google Scholar