Association Between Satisfaction with Nasal Appearance and Olfactory Function in Patients Undergoing Septorhinoplasty Surgery

Abstract

Background: Any surgery has some complications, and septorhinoplasty is not an exception. The aim of this study was to highlight the relationship between satisfaction with nasal appearance and olfactory function in patients undergoing septorhinoplasty. Methods: This is a cohort study. In this study, 384 patients aged 18 to 45 years who referred to the Ear, Nose and Throat department at Rasoul Akram hospital and private clinics in 2019 underwent septorhinoplasty. All patients were tested by the Persian Smell Identification Test (PSIT) or Rapid Smell Test (RST) before surgery. They were also reassessed one and three months after surgery. Those patients with dissatisfaction with olfactory function after surgery were also followed up for three months and assessed by PSIT or RST to determine their olfactory dysfunction. Results: One month after surgery, 73.5% of patients who were not satisfied with their nasal appearance also complained about the olfactory sense. In addition, 1.5% of patients who were satisfied with their nasal appearance also complained about the olfactory sense. There was a significant difference regarding complaints of the olfactory sense between patients satisfied with their nasal appearance and those not satisfied with their appearance (P<0.05). Three months after surgery, 78.9% patients who were not pleased with their nasal appearance also had an olfactory complaint. Besides, 0.9% of patients who were pleased with their nasal shape also had an olfactory complaint. There was a significant difference regarding olfactory complaints between patients who were pleased with their nasal shape and those who were not (P<0.05). Conclusion: One and three months after septorhinoplasty, most patients who are satisfied with their nasal appearance have no complaints about their olfactory sense, and most patients who are not satisfied with their nasal appearance complain about the olfactory sense. An appropriate outcome of septorhinoplasty with regard to improving olfactory functional status is accompanied by patients’ satisfaction level of achieving good nasal appearance.

Septorhinoplasty and the Late Impact on Olfactory Function: A Review and Meta-analysis

“…Contrarily, these findings describe a general tendency for olfactory improvement, although they do not reach statistical significance (Figure 4). Indeed, it is important to observe that significance was mainly counterposed by recent work from Mohebi et al 31 . This paper details some occurrences of late "abnormal" OF following SRP (Figure 4).…”

“…Figure 1 displays the flow diagram of the selection. The primary outcome measure was OF in 8 studies 2,21,24-29 , and the primary outcome included OF (and other outcome variables) in 3 studies 13,30,31 . Multiple objective tools were used among studies to asses OF (Table 1), with three studies using some form of the Sniffin' Sticks Test 21,25,30 , 2 studies using the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research…”

“…Of those selected, all were prospective; one was prospective randomized, 13 two comparative, 24,25 and eight noncomparative studies. 2,21,[26][27][28][29][30][31] The final sample comprised 875 patients preoperatively, with 10 patients lost to follow-up, totaling 865 patients with complete follow-up. ►Fig.…”

“…The primary outcome measure was OF in eight studies, 2,21,24-29 and the primary outcome included OF (and other outcome variables) in three studies. 13,30,31 Multiple objective tools were used among studies to assess OF (►Table 1), with three studies using some form of the SST, 21,25,30 two studies using the CCCRC test, 13,24 two using the UPSIT, 2,28 and the remaining using different tests (see ►Table 1). Sample sizes of interest (SRP patients) ranged from 14 to 384.…”

“…Among the 11 included studies, at the final OF measuring point, 5 studies (45.5%) reported significant improvement in objective OF, 13,21,25,29,30 5 others (45.5%) 2,24,26-28 described no significant differences, and 1 (9%) described aggravated OF after SRP. 31 Concerning the risk of systematic bias, five studies (45.5%) were considered to be good, 2,24,25,27,29 five (45.5%) were considered to be fair, 13,21,28,30,31 and one (9%) was considered to be poor 26 (see ►Table 2 for details).…”