空鼻综合征的手术和再生治疗方案:系统综述。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Do Hyun Kim, Mohammed Abdullah Basurrah, Soo Whan Kim, Sung Won Kim
{"title":"空鼻综合征的手术和再生治疗方案:系统综述。","authors":"Do Hyun Kim, Mohammed Abdullah Basurrah, Soo Whan Kim, Sung Won Kim","doi":"10.21053/ceo.2023.00038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Patients with empty nose syndrome typically experience paradoxical nasal congestion, nasal dryness, epistaxis, and suffocation. Conservative management is generally preferred for empty nose syndrome. However, some patients continue to experience persistent symptoms. When symptoms do not resolve, surgical options are considered. Therefore, we reviewed the surgical and regenerative treatment options for empty nose syndrome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched from the earliest date provided in the database until December 2022. This review included studies that assessed treatment outcomes using patient symptom scores, including the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20, -22, and -25) and the Empty Nose Syndrome 6-Item Questionnaire, supplemented by various clinical examinations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight studies were analyzed. Various materials were utilized, including submucosal injectable materials, allografts/xenografts/cadaveric implants, autologous implants, and synthetic implants. The polyethylene implant was the most commonly used (23.3%), followed by autologous, homologous, or cadaveric costal cartilage (20%). The anterior-inferior lateral nasal wall was the most frequent site of administration. Most studies indicated that surgical intervention led to significant improvements in clinical outcomes, as evidenced by endoscopic exams, acoustic rhinometry, and computed tomography scans, along with patient-reported enhancements in nasal symptoms, psychological well-being, and overall health-related quality of life. However, several studies found no improvement in certain psychological-related questionnaires or saccharin transit times. The average follow-up duration was 12.0 months (range, 2.0-27.6 months). Only two studies reported postoperative adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Several surgical options and recent tissue regeneration techniques have demonstrated efficacy in treating empty nose syndrome. However, more detailed investigations involving a larger number of participants and a randomized control study are necessary to establish a standardized treatment protocol for patients with empty nose syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":10318,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11375171/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical and Regenerative Treatment Options for Empty Nose Syndrome: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Do Hyun Kim, Mohammed Abdullah Basurrah, Soo Whan Kim, Sung Won Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.21053/ceo.2023.00038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Patients with empty nose syndrome typically experience paradoxical nasal congestion, nasal dryness, epistaxis, and suffocation. Conservative management is generally preferred for empty nose syndrome. However, some patients continue to experience persistent symptoms. When symptoms do not resolve, surgical options are considered. Therefore, we reviewed the surgical and regenerative treatment options for empty nose syndrome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched from the earliest date provided in the database until December 2022. This review included studies that assessed treatment outcomes using patient symptom scores, including the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20, -22, and -25) and the Empty Nose Syndrome 6-Item Questionnaire, supplemented by various clinical examinations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight studies were analyzed. Various materials were utilized, including submucosal injectable materials, allografts/xenografts/cadaveric implants, autologous implants, and synthetic implants. The polyethylene implant was the most commonly used (23.3%), followed by autologous, homologous, or cadaveric costal cartilage (20%). The anterior-inferior lateral nasal wall was the most frequent site of administration. Most studies indicated that surgical intervention led to significant improvements in clinical outcomes, as evidenced by endoscopic exams, acoustic rhinometry, and computed tomography scans, along with patient-reported enhancements in nasal symptoms, psychological well-being, and overall health-related quality of life. However, several studies found no improvement in certain psychological-related questionnaires or saccharin transit times. The average follow-up duration was 12.0 months (range, 2.0-27.6 months). Only two studies reported postoperative adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Several surgical options and recent tissue regeneration techniques have demonstrated efficacy in treating empty nose syndrome. However, more detailed investigations involving a larger number of participants and a randomized control study are necessary to establish a standardized treatment protocol for patients with empty nose syndrome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11375171/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2023.00038\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2023.00038","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:空鼻综合征患者通常患有矛盾性鼻塞、鼻腔干燥、鼻衄和窒息。保守治疗是空鼻综合征的一般选择。然而,也有一些患者会持续抱怨症状。如果症状持续存在,就需要考虑手术治疗。因此,我们回顾了空鼻综合征的手术和再生治疗方案:方法:我们检索了 PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Cochrane Controlled Trials Register 和 Google Scholar,检索时间从数据库提供的最早日期开始,直至 2022 年 12 月。在这些研究中,治疗效果是通过患者症状评分来衡量的,如中国-鼻结果测试(SNOT-20、22和25)、空鼻综合征6项问卷(ENS6Q)以及各种临床检查:结果:分析了 28 项研究。结果:分析了 28 项研究,使用了粘膜下注射材料、同种异体移植/异种移植/卡达维植入物、自体植入物和合成植入物。其中,聚乙烯植入物最常用(23.3%),其次是自体、同种或尸体肋软骨(20%)。最常见的植入部位是鼻腔前内侧外侧壁。大多数研究显示,手术干预能显著改善内窥镜检查、声学鼻测量和 CT 等临床结果,以及患者的鼻部症状、心理或整体健康相关生活质量问卷调查报告。不过,有几项研究并未证实某些心理相关问卷或糖精转运时间的改善效果。平均随访时间为 12.0(2.0-27.6)个月。只有两项研究报告了术后不良反应:结论:几种手术方案和最新的组织再生技术在治疗空鼻综合征方面显示出了积极的疗效。然而,还需要进行更多的详细调查和随机对照研究,以制定治疗空鼻症患者的标准化方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surgical and Regenerative Treatment Options for Empty Nose Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

Objectives: Patients with empty nose syndrome typically experience paradoxical nasal congestion, nasal dryness, epistaxis, and suffocation. Conservative management is generally preferred for empty nose syndrome. However, some patients continue to experience persistent symptoms. When symptoms do not resolve, surgical options are considered. Therefore, we reviewed the surgical and regenerative treatment options for empty nose syndrome.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched from the earliest date provided in the database until December 2022. This review included studies that assessed treatment outcomes using patient symptom scores, including the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20, -22, and -25) and the Empty Nose Syndrome 6-Item Questionnaire, supplemented by various clinical examinations.

Results: Twenty-eight studies were analyzed. Various materials were utilized, including submucosal injectable materials, allografts/xenografts/cadaveric implants, autologous implants, and synthetic implants. The polyethylene implant was the most commonly used (23.3%), followed by autologous, homologous, or cadaveric costal cartilage (20%). The anterior-inferior lateral nasal wall was the most frequent site of administration. Most studies indicated that surgical intervention led to significant improvements in clinical outcomes, as evidenced by endoscopic exams, acoustic rhinometry, and computed tomography scans, along with patient-reported enhancements in nasal symptoms, psychological well-being, and overall health-related quality of life. However, several studies found no improvement in certain psychological-related questionnaires or saccharin transit times. The average follow-up duration was 12.0 months (range, 2.0-27.6 months). Only two studies reported postoperative adverse effects.

Conclusion: Several surgical options and recent tissue regeneration techniques have demonstrated efficacy in treating empty nose syndrome. However, more detailed investigations involving a larger number of participants and a randomized control study are necessary to establish a standardized treatment protocol for patients with empty nose syndrome.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology (Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol, CEO) is an international peer-reviewed journal on recent developments in diagnosis and treatment of otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery and dedicated to the advancement of patient care in ear, nose, throat, head, and neck disorders. This journal publishes original articles relating to both clinical and basic researches, reviews, and clinical trials, encompassing the whole topics of otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery. CEO was first issued in 2008 and this journal is published in English four times (the last day of February, May, August, and November) per year by the Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. The Journal aims at publishing evidence-based, scientifically written articles from different disciplines of otorhinolaryngology field. The readership contains clinical/basic research into current practice in otorhinolaryngology, audiology, speech pathology, head and neck oncology, plastic and reconstructive surgery. The readers are otolaryngologists, head and neck surgeons and oncologists, audiologists, and speech pathologists.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信