Cited by 29Nasal Surgery and Airway StudiesSinusitis and nasal conditionsCleft Lip and Palate Research

A Simple and Reliable Method of Patient Evaluation in the Surgical Treatment of Nasal Obstruction

Constantinides, Minas, Galli, Suzanne K. Doud, Miller, Philip J.·2002·Ear, Nose & Throat Journal

Abstract

We have developed a simple method of evaluating nasal obstruction both before and after corrective surgery. With our system, patients self-rate their nasal patency on a 10-point visual analog scale under different conditions. After a baseline self-assessment, patients rate their breathing while the examiner lifts the lower lateral nasal cartilage with an ear curette and again during lifting of the upper lateral cartilage. Separate assessments during cartilage support are made before and after the patient has received nasal decongestion therapy. The results of these manipulations help identify the specific structural abnormality and its anatomic site, thereby serving as a reliable aid to planning surgery (i.e., open septorhinoplasty, turbinoplasty, external valve surgery with alar batten grafts, and/or internal valve surgery with spreader grafts with or without composite skin/cartilage grafts). We tested our method in preoperative evaluation and surgical planning on 19 patients with nasal obstructions. Our method was just as useful in making postoperative assessments. and it allowed us to judge the effectiveness of specific procedures in restoring nasal patency. Of the 19 patients, 18 (94.77%) reported that their nasal breathing had im proved following surgery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/014556130208101015

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Modified Cottle's maneuver was found useful as a reliable aid in preoperative evaluation of nasal obstruction and postoperative assessment of nasal patency.

    “Constantinides et al. [9] found the method to be useful as a reliable aid in preoperative evaluation of nasal obstruction and postoperative assessment of nasal patency.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Constantinides, M., Galli, S. K. D., & Miller, P. J.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
Ear, Nose & Throat Journal
Published
2002-10
Volume
81
Issue
10
Pages
734-737
ISSN
  • 0145-5613 (ISSN-L)
  • 1942-7522
OpenAlex
W2398583890
Cited by
29
References
8
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ear Nose & Throat Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Sinusitis and nasal conditions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Cleft Lip and Palate Research
Keywords
nasal obstruction, nasal patency, patient self-assessment, visual analogue scale, lower lateral cartilage, upper lateral cartilages, surgical planning, septorhinoplasty, turbinoplasty, spreader grafts, postoperative outcomes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Airway Resistance, Equipment Design, Equipment Safety, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Nasal Cavity, Otolaryngology, Postoperative Period, Preoperative Care, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Severity of Illness Index, Nasal Obstruction, Treatment Outcome, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review