Surgical outcome comparison between endoscopic septoplasty and conventional septoplasty among patients with nasal septal deviation


  • K. Sharath Babu Department of ENT, Saraswati Medical College, Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, India
  • R. Shankar Department of Preventive Medicine, Vinayaka Mission's Kirupananda Variyar Medical College and Hospital, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India



Conventional septoplasty, Endoscopic septoplasty, Diagnostic nasal endoscopy, NOSE score


Background: When compared with standard head light technique, endoscopic septoplasty provides important advantages which include adequate visualization, room for instrumentation during functional endoscopic sinus surgery, access to para nasal sinuses and for other surgeries like trans-septal approach to the sphenoid sinus, visualization and stoppage of post-nasal bleeds. The aim of the study was to assess and compare the surgical outcome between endoscopic septoplasty and conventional septoplasty techniques in terms of anatomical correction and its complications.

Methods: A prospective clinical study was conducted on hundred patients with nasal obstruction. Group A patients (n=50) underwent conventional septoplasty and group B (n=50) patients were operated by endoscopic septoplasty technique. Patients were subjected to diagnostic nasal endoscopy examination before and after surgery. Post-operative complications like trauma to lateral wall of nose, injury to cribriform plate, post-operative epistaxis, post-operative septal hematoma and septal abscess if occurred were noted.  

Results: Post-operatively diagnostic nasal endoscopy results show that there was a statistically significant improvement in endoscopic septoplasty group compared to conventional septoplasty and similarly the mean nasal obstruction symptom evaluation score. The most common post-operative complications which were occurred are synechiae and septal perforation and both these complications were more common among the conventional septoplasty group and the difference was found to be statistically significant.

Conclusions: The study showed a better surgical outcome with a lesser complication among the endoscopic septoplasty as compared to conventional septoplasty. The only disadvantage of using endoscopic septoplasty was of binocular vision and repeated cleaning of the endoscope.


Mladina R, Čujić E, Šubarić M, Vuković K. Nasal septal deformities in ear, nose and throat patients: An International Study. Am J Otolaryngol. 2008;29(2):75-82.

Kawalski H, Spiewak P. How septum deformations in newborn occur. Int J Peadiatr Otorhinolaryngol. 1998;44(1):23-30.

Freer O. The correction of deflections of the nasal septum with a minimum of traumation. J Am Med Assoc. 1902;38:636

Killian G. The submucous window resection of the nasal septum. Ann Otol. 1905;14:363-7.

Cottle MH, Loring RM. Surgery on the nasal septum: New operative procedures and indications. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1948;57:705.

Maran AGD, Lund VJ. Trauma to nose and sinuses. In: 1st Edn.; Clinical Rhinology. New York: Thieme, 1990: 110-139.

Jain L, Jain M, Chouhan AN, Harshwardhan R. Conventional Septoplasty verses Endoscopic Septoplasty: A Comparative Study. People’s J Sci Res. 2011;4(2):24-8.

Lanza DC, Kennedy DW, Zinneich SJ. Nasal endoscopy and its surgical application. Essential Otolaryngology; head and neck Surgery. 5 edn. New York: Medical Examination; 1991: 373-387.

Stamberger H. Functional Endoscopic Sinosurgery. Philedelphia B. C. Decker; 1991: 156-159.

Cantrell H. Limited septoplasty for endoscopi sinus surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;116:274-7.

Yadav PK, Agarwal SP, Verma V, Rani P. A study of comparison between the efficacy of endoscopic septoplasty and traditional septoplasty. Int Surg J. 2016;3(3):1134-40.

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(2):157-63.

Haitham Abdul-Malik Al-Nori, Younis S. Mahdi, Ali A. Muttalib Mohammed.The effect of septoplasty on sequelae of nasal septal deviation Ann Coll Med Mosul. 2013;39(1):75-9.

Al-Shehri AM, Amin HM, Necklawy A. Retrospective study of endoscopic nasal septoplasty, Biomed Res. 2013;24(3):337-40.

Chung BJ, Batra PS, Citardi MJ, Lanza DC.: Endoscopic septoplasty: revisitation of the technique, indications, and outcomes. Am J Rhinol. 2007;21:307-11.

Jain L, Jain M, Chouhan AN, Harshwardhan R. Conventional Septoplasty Verses Endoscopic Septoplasty. People's J Sci Res. 2011;4(2)24-8.

Singla K, Singh B, Bhagat S, Verma BS. Endoscopic septoplasty: prospective study in 50 cases of DNS. Clin Rhinol An Int J. 2013;6(2):92-5.

Gupta M, Motwani G: Comparative study of endoscopic aided septoplasty and traditional septoplasty in posterior nasal septal deviations. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;57(4):309-11.

V. Krishna Chaitanya, N. Janardhan, S. Rajesh Kumar, G.Rakesh. Does the Use of an Endoscope in Conventional Septal Surgery Provide Benefit in Patients of Deviated Nasal Septum, Sch. J. App. Med. Sci, 2014;2(5):1824-7.

Manjunath Rao SV. Is endoscopic septoplasty really superior than conventional septoplasty?, National J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;1(10):16-8.

Koo SK, Choi JW, Kim YJ, Kim YJ. Retrospective Analysis Of Endoscopic Septoplasty. Korean Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg. 2012;55(9):559-64.

Paradis J, Rotenberg BW. Open Versus Endoscopic Septoplasty: A Single-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011;40(Suppl 1):S28-33.

Khan MN, Nath K, Uddin S. A clinical study of deviated nasal septum with special reference to conventional and endoscopic septoplasty. Int J Res Med Sci. 2016;4(12):5165-71.

Suligavi SS, Darde MK, Guttigoli B. Endoscopic Septoplasty; Advantages And Disadvantages; Clinical Rhinology. Int J. 2010;3(1):27-30.

Talluri KK, Motru B, Avvaru K, Babu R, Pradeep J. Correction of Deviated Nasal Septum: Conventional Vs Endoscopic Septoplasty. IOSR-JDMS. 2014;13(5):14-5.






Original Research Articles