A Comparative Study of Conventional versus Endoscopic Septoplasty

Abstract

Introduction
 The standard surgical treatment for symptomatic deviated septum is septoplasty. This is usually done conventionally using the headlight. However, in recent years the endoscopic method has emerged as an alternative technique. This study aims to compare results of conventional and endoscopic septoplasty
 Materials and Methods
 A study comprising of 44 patients, randomly divided in two groups, was undertaken to compare the efficacy of both the techniques. This study evaluated parameters like postoperative subjective improvement in symptoms, using the NOSE questionnaire, intra-operative blood loss, duration of surgery, post-operative pain and complications across the two groups.
 Further, cases were subgrouped according to the site of deviation as anterior, posterior or combined and the efficacy of these two methods for correcting different sites of deviation was assessed, using the same parameters.
 Results
 The endoscopic approach showed better overall clinical results, irrespective of the site of deviation. It was noted that correcting posterior deviations required shorter time and had lesser blood loss when operated using the endoscope whereas anterior deviations were dealt faster and had lesser bleeding by the conventional method. There was less pain and morbidity in the postoperative period in the endoscopic group as compared to conventional group.
 Discussion
 Historical perspective of the conventional and endoscopic septal surgery is mentioned. In review of literature on the four parameters of this study – Symptomatic improvement, intra-operative blood loss, post-operative pain and surgical complications, were compared with published reports.
 Conclusion
 Endoscopic septoplasty was found to have distinct advantages over the conventional method, more so for posterior septal deviations. It should be an option offered to all patients requiring septoplasty.