Cargando…

Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial

BACKGROUND: Dynamic nasal valve collapse (NVC) is a common factor contributing to nasal obstruction; however, it is often underdiagnosed and untreated. An in‐office, minimally invasive procedure addressing dynamic NVC uses a bioabsorbable implant (Latera) to support the lateral nasal wall. This stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stolovitzky, Pablo, Senior, Brent, Ow, Randall A., Mehendale, Neelesh, Bikhazi, Nadim, Sidle, Douglas M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6771676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31226238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22362
_version_ 1783455742353735680
author Stolovitzky, Pablo
Senior, Brent
Ow, Randall A.
Mehendale, Neelesh
Bikhazi, Nadim
Sidle, Douglas M.
author_facet Stolovitzky, Pablo
Senior, Brent
Ow, Randall A.
Mehendale, Neelesh
Bikhazi, Nadim
Sidle, Douglas M.
author_sort Stolovitzky, Pablo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Dynamic nasal valve collapse (NVC) is a common factor contributing to nasal obstruction; however, it is often underdiagnosed and untreated. An in‐office, minimally invasive procedure addressing dynamic NVC uses a bioabsorbable implant (Latera) to support the lateral nasal wall. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the treatment in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with sham control. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, single‐blinded RCT, 137 patients from 10 clinics were randomized into 2 arms: treatment arm (70 patients) and sham control arm (67 patients). Outcome measures were followed through 3 months after the procedure. The primary endpoint was the responder rate (percentage of patients with reduction in clinical severity by ≥1 category or ≥20% reduction in Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation [NOSE] score). RESULTS: Before the procedure, there were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics and nasal obstruction symptom measures between the 2 arms. Three months after the procedure, responder rate was significantly higher for the treatment arm compared to the control (82.5% vs 54.7%, p = 0.001). Patients in the treatment arm also had a significantly greater decrease in NOSE score (–42.4 ± 23.4 vs –22.7 ± 27.9, p < 0.0001) and significantly lower visual analogue scale (VAS) scores (–39.0 ± 29.7 vs –13.3 ± 30.0, p < 0.0001) than the sham control arm. Seventeen patients reported 19 procedure/implant‐related adverse events, all of which resolved with no clinical sequelae. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the safety and effectiveness of the bioabsorbable implant in reducing patients’ nasal obstruction symptoms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6771676
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67716762019-10-07 Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial Stolovitzky, Pablo Senior, Brent Ow, Randall A. Mehendale, Neelesh Bikhazi, Nadim Sidle, Douglas M. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Original Articles BACKGROUND: Dynamic nasal valve collapse (NVC) is a common factor contributing to nasal obstruction; however, it is often underdiagnosed and untreated. An in‐office, minimally invasive procedure addressing dynamic NVC uses a bioabsorbable implant (Latera) to support the lateral nasal wall. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the treatment in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with sham control. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, single‐blinded RCT, 137 patients from 10 clinics were randomized into 2 arms: treatment arm (70 patients) and sham control arm (67 patients). Outcome measures were followed through 3 months after the procedure. The primary endpoint was the responder rate (percentage of patients with reduction in clinical severity by ≥1 category or ≥20% reduction in Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation [NOSE] score). RESULTS: Before the procedure, there were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics and nasal obstruction symptom measures between the 2 arms. Three months after the procedure, responder rate was significantly higher for the treatment arm compared to the control (82.5% vs 54.7%, p = 0.001). Patients in the treatment arm also had a significantly greater decrease in NOSE score (–42.4 ± 23.4 vs –22.7 ± 27.9, p < 0.0001) and significantly lower visual analogue scale (VAS) scores (–39.0 ± 29.7 vs –13.3 ± 30.0, p < 0.0001) than the sham control arm. Seventeen patients reported 19 procedure/implant‐related adverse events, all of which resolved with no clinical sequelae. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the safety and effectiveness of the bioabsorbable implant in reducing patients’ nasal obstruction symptoms. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-21 2019-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6771676/ /pubmed/31226238 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22362 Text en © 2019 The Authors International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy and American Rhinologic Society This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Stolovitzky, Pablo
Senior, Brent
Ow, Randall A.
Mehendale, Neelesh
Bikhazi, Nadim
Sidle, Douglas M.
Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title_full Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title_fullStr Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title_short Assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
title_sort assessment of bioabsorbable implant treatment for nasal valve collapse compared to a sham group: a randomized control trial
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6771676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31226238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/alr.22362
work_keys_str_mv AT stolovitzkypablo assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial
AT seniorbrent assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial
AT owrandalla assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial
AT mehendaleneelesh assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial
AT bikhazinadim assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial
AT sidledouglasm assessmentofbioabsorbableimplanttreatmentfornasalvalvecollapsecomparedtoashamgrouparandomizedcontroltrial