Extracorporeal Septoplasty for Severe Nasal Septal Deviation: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Extracorporeal septoplasty (ECS) is a surgical technique used to address severe nasal septal deviations, especially in patients in whom in situ septoplasty (ISS) is insufficient. This systematic review assesses the efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes of ECS techniques, including conventional and modified ECS methods. Data Sources: PRISMA-compliant systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. Methods: Studies on ECS techniques were included. Eligibility criteria were established using the PICOTS framework. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Functional and aesthetic improvements were primary outcomes, while complication rates represented secondary outcomes. Results: Twenty-two studies (retrospective, prospective, and RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. ECS was associated with significant functional improvement, as assessed by nasal obstruction scores measured by NOSE scores, acoustic rhinometry, and rhinomanometry. Aesthetic results were also satisfactory, with a significant improvement in the nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle, and the tip projection index, as well as good patients' satisfaction. Complications were rare, with few cases of septal perforation, graft resorption, or residual nasal obstructive symptoms. Evidence strength was limited considering the majority of included studies were retrospective, with inherent bias risks, small sample sizes, and inconsistent follow-up durations. Conclusions: ECS may be a successful and safe method for severe septal deviation correction, providing functional and aesthetic results with a low complication rate. More high-quality, multicenter RCTs with long-term follow-up will be required for a standardization of surgical protocols and outcome measures. Level of Evidence: 2.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".