Temperature-Controlled Radiofrequency for Severe Nasal Airway Obstruction: A Non-Inferiority Comparison With Surgical Intervention

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology Pub Date : 2026-10-04 Epub Date: 2026-04-14 DOI:10.1002/alr.70165
Greg Davis, Zeeshan Aziz, Jose Barrera, William Blythe, Chris Davis, Steven Davis, Thomas Higgins, Charles Lano, Gregory Levitin, Frederick Lopatin, Samuel Oyer, Stacey Silvers, Ariel Waitzman, Randall Ow
{"title":"Temperature-Controlled Radiofrequency for Severe Nasal Airway Obstruction: A Non-Inferiority Comparison With Surgical Intervention","authors":"Greg Davis,&nbsp;Zeeshan Aziz,&nbsp;Jose Barrera,&nbsp;William Blythe,&nbsp;Chris Davis,&nbsp;Steven Davis,&nbsp;Thomas Higgins,&nbsp;Charles Lano,&nbsp;Gregory Levitin,&nbsp;Frederick Lopatin,&nbsp;Samuel Oyer,&nbsp;Stacey Silvers,&nbsp;Ariel Waitzman,&nbsp;Randall Ow","doi":"10.1002/alr.70165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF), septoplasty (ST) with turbinate reduction, and functional rhinoplasty (FR) are treatment options for nasal airway obstruction (NAO) and nasal valve dysfunction (NVD), but no direct comparison of these procedures has been performed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority (NI) trial, conducted at 29 US sites, used a prespecified NI margin and inverse probability of treatment weighting to simulate randomization and facilitate an unbiased comparison of TCRF to ST and FR in adults with Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scores ≥ 55 and NVD. NI was determined using a 15% difference in the 3-month responder rate (≥ 24-point NOSE score improvement) for TCRF compared to ST and FR. Additional analyses included return to work/regular activities (RTW) and adverse events (AEs).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 174 patients were treated (116 TCRF and 58 surgery [35 ST, 23 FR]). At 3 months, TCRF was non-inferior to surgery with a 90.5% responder rate compared to 94.3% for ST (mean difference: 0.04 [95% CI, −0.02 to 0.11]; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) and 95.7% for FR (mean difference: −0.12 [95% CI, −0.23 to 0]; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). TCRF median RTW was 1 day versus 5.5 and 7.5 days for ST and FR, respectively. TCRF had fewer AEs than surgery (6.9% TCRF patients vs. 19.0% for surgical arms combined).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>TCRF patient treatment response was non-inferior to ST and FR, with fewer AEs and faster RTW. These findings support TCRF as a minimally invasive alternative to nasal surgery for patients with NAO and NVD.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06922955</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13716,"journal":{"name":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","volume":"16 10","pages":"1073-1083"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alr.70165","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alr.70165","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF), septoplasty (ST) with turbinate reduction, and functional rhinoplasty (FR) are treatment options for nasal airway obstruction (NAO) and nasal valve dysfunction (NVD), but no direct comparison of these procedures has been performed.

Methods

This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority (NI) trial, conducted at 29 US sites, used a prespecified NI margin and inverse probability of treatment weighting to simulate randomization and facilitate an unbiased comparison of TCRF to ST and FR in adults with Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scores ≥ 55 and NVD. NI was determined using a 15% difference in the 3-month responder rate (≥ 24-point NOSE score improvement) for TCRF compared to ST and FR. Additional analyses included return to work/regular activities (RTW) and adverse events (AEs).

Results

A total of 174 patients were treated (116 TCRF and 58 surgery [35 ST, 23 FR]). At 3 months, TCRF was non-inferior to surgery with a 90.5% responder rate compared to 94.3% for ST (mean difference: 0.04 [95% CI, −0.02 to 0.11]; p < 0.001) and 95.7% for FR (mean difference: −0.12 [95% CI, −0.23 to 0]; p < 0.001). TCRF median RTW was 1 day versus 5.5 and 7.5 days for ST and FR, respectively. TCRF had fewer AEs than surgery (6.9% TCRF patients vs. 19.0% for surgical arms combined).

Conclusions

TCRF patient treatment response was non-inferior to ST and FR, with fewer AEs and faster RTW. These findings support TCRF as a minimally invasive alternative to nasal surgery for patients with NAO and NVD.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06922955

温控射频治疗严重鼻气道阻塞:与手术治疗的非劣效性比较。
导语:温控射频(TCRF)、鼻中隔成形术(ST)合并鼻甲复位和功能性鼻成形术(FR)是鼻气道阻塞(NAO)和鼻瓣膜功能障碍(NVD)的治疗选择,但没有对这些手术进行直接比较。方法:这项前瞻性、开放标签、非效性(NI)试验,在美国29个地点进行,使用预先指定的NI边际和治疗加权逆概率来模拟随机化,并促进TCRF与ST和FR在鼻塞症状评估评分≥55和NVD的成人中的无偏比较。与ST和FR相比,使用TCRF的3个月应答率(≥24分NOSE评分改善)的15%差异来确定NI。其他分析包括恢复工作/正常活动(RTW)和不良事件(ae)。结果:共174例患者接受治疗(TCRF 116例,手术58例[35 ST, 23 FR])。3个月时,TCRF的应答率为90.5%,优于ST的94.3%(平均差异为0.04 [95% CI, -0.02至0.11];p结论:TCRF患者的治疗反应不逊于ST和FR, ae更少,RTW更快。这些发现支持TCRF作为NAO和NVD患者鼻手术的微创替代方法。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT06922955。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
10.90%
发文量
185
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Forum of Allergy & Rhinologyis a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and the Official Journal of the American Rhinologic Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy. International Forum of Allergy Rhinology provides a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and others to publish original research and explore controversies in the medical and surgical treatment of patients with otolaryngic allergy, rhinologic, and skull base conditions. The application of current research to the management of otolaryngic allergy, rhinologic, and skull base diseases and the need for further investigation will be highlighted.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书