Endoscopic vs. conventional septoplasty: A review of the literature

Abstract

The aim of this review of literature was to compare conventional and endoscopic septoplasty in terms of operating time, functional efficacy and perioperative morbidity. A systematic review of the scientific literature was performed on the PubMed database, Google and Google Scholar, searching for randomized prospective trials comparing endoscopic and conventional septoplasty. The primary endpoint was operating time, and the secondary endpoints were intra- and postoperative complications, postoperative pain, hospital stay and functional result. Twenty-nine articles published between 1991 and 2012 compared conventional and endoscopic septoplasty, five of which were prospective randomized trials. Operating time was shorter with endoscopic surgery (P<0.001), with less mucosal damage (P<0.01); there was less synechia (P<0.01) and residual deformity (P<0.05); and postoperative pain was milder. Endoscopic septoplasty thus shortened surgery time and reduced perioperative complications, but the functional result was the same as with conventional septoplasty.

Keywords: Endoscopic septoplasty; Literature review; Operating time.