Quality of Life in Patients with Nasal Septal Deviation After Septal Correction

  • K. MuthubabuEmail author
  • M. K. Srinivasan
  • Saai Ram Thejas
  • M. Sindu
  • R. Vinayak
  • C. Surya Gayathri
Original Article


Septal Correction is an age-old procedure being practiced for the major part of a century now. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of life after Septal Correction. Fifty patients with complaints of nasal obstruction, trouble breathing via the nose, headache and facial pain were selected for the study. Initial pre-operative assessment was done based on a symptomatic score [Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation Scale (NOSE Scale)]. The presence of a septal deviation was confirmed with an X-ray and computed tomography of the paranasal sinuses along with a diagnostic nasal endoscopy. Based on the extent and location of deviation, the malformed part was corrected. Post-operative assessment was done after a period of 8 weeks based on the NOSE Scale. The results were co-related and documented. It was found that the scores were better post-surgery. Thus, it can be concluded that Septal Correction as a surgical procedure is still relevant in today’s World for symptomatic betterment and for a healthier lifestyle.


Deviated nasal septum Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation Septal Correction Quality of life 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There were no conflicts of interest in the conduct of this study.

Informed Consent

We have received a written consent from every patient with respect to Anaesthesia administered, procedure and also the risks and benefits were explained in detail.


  1. 1.
    Bilal N, Selcuk A, Karakus MF, Ikinciogullari A, Ensari S, Dere H (2013) Impact of corrective rhinologic surgery on rhinogenic headache. J Craniofacial Surg 5:1688–1691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fettman N, Sanford T, Sindwani R (2009) Surgical management of the deviated septum: techniques in septoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 42:241–252, viiiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Killian G (1905) The submucous window resection of the Nasal Septum. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 14:363–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freer OT (1902) The correction of deflections of the Nasal Septum with a minimum of traumatism. JAMA XXXVIII:636–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT (2004) Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130:157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marro M, Mondina M, Stoll D, de Gabory L (2011) French validation of the NOSE and Rhino-QOL questionnaires in the management of Nasal Obstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 144:988–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Altin F, Haci C, Alimoglu Y, Yilmaz S (2018) Is septoplasty effective rhinogenic headache in patients with isolated contact point between inferior turbinate and septal spur? Am J Otolaryngol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sen I, Dutta M, Haldar D, Sinha R (2017) Estimation of partitioning of airflow in septal surgery: a prospective study with reference to the NOSE scale. Ear Nose Throat J 96(2):E6–E12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barelli PA, Loch EE, Kern EB, Steiner A (1987) Rhinology: the collected writings of Maurice H. Cottle MD. Warwick. American Rhinologic Society, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Floris V, van Zijl WJ, Timman R, Datema F (2017) Adaptation and validation of the Dutch version of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lipan MJ, Most SP (2013) Development of a severity classification system for subjective nasal obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 15(5):358–361. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lodder WL, Leong SC (2018) What are the clinically important outcome measures in the surgical management of nasal obstruction? Clin Otolaryngol 43:567–571. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Andrews PJ, Jacques T, Nip L, Li CH, Leung T (2017) A UK survey of current ENT practice in the assessment of nasal patency. J Laryngol Otol 131:702–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Derin S, Sahan M, Deveer M, Erdogan S, Tetiker H, Koseoglu S (2016) The causes of persistent and recurrent nasal obstruction after primary septoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 27:828–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hsu HC, Tan CD, Chang CW, Chu CW, Chiu YC, Pan CJ, Huang HM (2017) Evaluation of nasal patency by visual analogue scale/Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation questionnaires and anterior active rhinomanometry after Septoplasty: a Retrospective one-year follow-up cohort study. Clin Otolaryngol 42:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eren SB, Tugrul S, Dogan R (2014) Objective and Subjective evaluation of operation success in patients with nasal septal deviation based on septum type. Ann. J. Rhinol. Allergy 28:158–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Muthubabu
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. K. Srinivasan
    • 1
  • Saai Ram Thejas
    • 1
  • M. Sindu
    • 1
  • R. Vinayak
    • 1
  • C. Surya Gayathri
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Neck and Neck SurgeryMeenakshi Medical College, Hospital and Research InstituteKanchipuramIndia

Personalised recommendations