Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Facial Plast Surg 2022; 38(05): 495-503
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740948
Original Research

Long-Term Follow-up from the Treatment and Crossover Arms of a Randomized Controlled Trial of an Absorbable Nasal Implant for Dynamic Nasal Valve Collapse

Nadim Bikhazi
1   Department of ENT, Ogden Clinic, South Ogden, Utah
,
Randall A. Ow
2   Sacramento Ear Nose and Throat Medical and Surgical Group, Roseville, California
,
Ellen M. O'Malley 
3   ENT Clinical Affairs, Stryker Corp, Plymouth, Minnesota
,
Nora Perkins
4   Department of ENT, Albany ENT and Allergy Services, Albany, New York
,
Douglas M. Sidle
5   Department of Otolarygology—Head and Neck Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
,
Pablo Stolovitzky
6   Department of Otolaryngology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

We report the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of the treatment and crossover arms of a randomized controlled trial evaluating an absorbable nasal implant to address dynamic nasal valve collapse. Participants were adults with severe/extreme nasal airway obstruction primarily due to nasal valve insufficiency who had implant placement. Follow-up visits were at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post implant. Visits included collection of the following patient-reported outcome measures: nasal obstructive symptom evaluation (NOSE), nasal obstruction visual analog scale (VAS), and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Adverse events were evaluated at each visit. One-hundred-eleven participants with implants were followed. Of the 111, 90 completed the 12-month visit and 70 completed the 24-month visit. NOSE responder rates are greater than 80% at all follow-ups through 24 months. Mean reduction from baseline in NOSE scores is ≥30 points and statistically significant (p <0.001) at all time points through 24 months. Mean VAS score reduction is ≥29.7 points and statistically significant (p <0.001) at all time points. The subgroup of participants with baseline ESS values >10 experienced statistically significant (p <0.001) and clinically meaningful reductions at all postimplant periods, suggesting that the reduction in nasal symptoms may reduce daytime sleepiness for patients who have problems with sleep quality. No serious device-/procedure-related adverse events were reported. Implant migration/retrieval rate was 4.5% (10/222) of total implants or 9% of participants (10/111). The implant is safe and effective for dynamic nasal valve collapse in patients with severe/extreme nasal obstruction and provides durable symptom improvement 24 months after placement.

Keywords

nasal valve collapse - nasal airway obstruction - bioabsorbable implant - lateral wall - nasal valve collapse

Trial Registration

This study is registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03400787).




Publication History

Article published online:
29 December 2021

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Stewart M, Ferguson B, Fromer L. Epidemiology and burden of nasal congestion. Int J Gen Med 2010; 3: 37-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rhee JS, Poetker DM, Smith TL, Bustillo A, Burzynski M, Davis RE. Nasal valve surgery improves disease-specific quality of life. Laryngoscope 2005; 115 (03) 437-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wever CC. The nasal airway: a critical review. Facial Plast Surg 2016; 32 (01) 17-21
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Camacho M, Riaz M, Capasso R. et al. The effect of nasal surgery on continuous positive airway pressure device use and therapeutic treatment pressures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep (Basel) 2015; 38 (02) 279-286
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Becker SS, Dobratz EJ, Stowell N, Barker D, Park SS. Revision septoplasty: review of sources of persistent nasal obstruction. Am J Rhinol 2008; 22 (04) 440-444
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Constantian MB, Clardy RB. The relative importance of septal and nasal valvular surgery in correcting airway obstruction in primary and secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996; 98 (01) 38-54 , discussion 55–58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ricci E, Palonta F, Preti G. et al. Role of nasal valve in the surgically corrected nasal respiratory obstruction: evaluation through rhinomanometry. Am J Rhinol 2001; 15 (05) 307-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Clark DW, Del Signore AG, Raithatha R, Senior BA. Nasal airway obstruction: prevalence and anatomic contributors. Ear Nose Throat J 2018; 97 (06) 173-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Stewart MG, Smith TL, Weaver EM. et al. Outcomes after nasal septoplasty: results from the Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130 (03) 283-290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rhee JS, Sullivan CD, Frank DO, Kimbell JS, Garcia GJM. A systematic review of patient-reported nasal obstruction scores: defining normative and symptomatic ranges in surgical patients. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2014; 16 (03) 219-225 , quiz 232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Paccoi P, Di Peco V. Septal cartilage graft for nasal valve incompetence associated with deviated septum. Am J Rhinol 2007; 21 (05) 622-625
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Murrell GL. Auricular cartilage grafts and nasal surgery. Laryngoscope 2004; 114 (12) 2092-2102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Gunter JP, Friedman RM. Lateral crural strut graft: technique and clinical applications in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99 (04) 943-952 , discussion 953–955
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Toriumi DM, Josen J, Weinberger M, Tardy Jr ME. Use of alar batten grafts for correction of nasal valve collapse. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997; 123 (08) 802-808
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Islam A, Arslan N, Felek SA, Celik H, Demirci M, Oguz H. Reconstruction of the internal nasal valve: modified splay graft technique with endonasal approach. Laryngoscope 2008; 118 (10) 1739-1743
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Akcam T, Friedman O, Cook TA. The effect on snoring of structural nasal valve dilatation with a butterfly graft. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130 (11) 1313-1318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Stolovitzky P, Senior B, Ow RA, Mehendale N, Bikhazi N, Sidle DM. Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2019; 9 (08) 850-856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130 (02) 157-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Johns MW. A new method for measuring daytime sleepiness: the Epworth sleepiness scale. Sleep 1991; 14 (06) 540-545
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Lipan MJ, Most SP. Development of a severity classification system for subjective nasal obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2013; 15 (05) 358-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rippy MK, Baron S, Rosenthal M, Senior BA. Evaluation of absorbable PLA nasal implants in an ovine model. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol 2018; 3 (03) 156-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 San Nicoló M, Stelter K, Sadick H, Bas M, Berghaus A. A 2-year follow-up study of an absorbable implant to treat nasal valve collapse. Facial Plast Surg 2018; 34 (05) 545-550
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Sidle DM, Stolovitzky P, O'Malley EM, Ow RA, Nachlas NE, Silvers S. Bioabsorbable implant for treatment of dynamic nasal valve collapse with or without concomitant procedures. Facial Plast Surg 2021; 37 (05) 673-680
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Chambers KJ, Horstkotte KA, Shanley K, Lindsay RW. Evaluation of improvement in nasal obstruction following nasal valve correction in patients with a history of failed septoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2015; 17 (05) 347-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Calloway HE, Heilbronn CM, Gu JT, Pham TT, Barnes CH, Wong BJF. Functional outcomes, quantitative morphometry, and aesthetic analysis of articulated alar rim grafts in septorhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2019; 21 (06) 558-565
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Standlee AG, Hohman MH. Evaluating the effect of spreader grafting on nasal obstruction using the NOSE scale. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2017; 126 (03) 219-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ishii L, Roxbury C, Godoy A, Ishman S, Ishii M. Does nasal surgery improve OSA in patients with nasal obstruction and OSA? A meta-analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015; 153 (03) 326-333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Morgan NJ, MacGregor FB, Birchall MA, Lund VJ, Sittampalam Y. Racial differences in nasal fossa dimensions determined by acoustic rhinometry. Rhinology 1995; 33 (04) 224-228
    PubMedGoogle Scholar