“…After retrieval and reviewing the references of those articles, an additional five articles were downloaded [ 19 , 47 – 50 ]. Of the 50 articles reviewed in their entirety, the following are reasons for exclusion: two were letters to the editor [ 13 , 49 ], one classified nasal defects based on subunits and corrective surgeries [ 24 ], one study correlated previously described systems in their patients [ 37 ], one used a previously published classification system [ 46 ], one described trauma and surgical techniques [ 2 ], two referenced their own previously described classification system [ 21 , 28 ], one was a questions and answers article [ 17 ], two articles focused on the external nasal deformities [ 15 , 39 ], fourteen articles focused on operative techniques [ 4 , 18 – 20 , 29 – 32 , 35 , 36 , 38 , 40 , 47 , 50 ], and ten articles failed to meet criteria as classification systems [ 5 , 7 , 9 – 12 , 14 , 22 , 34 , 42 ]. A total of fifteen articles met inclusion criteria for describing internal nasal septal deviation classification systems [ 3 , 6 , 8 , 16 , 23 , 25 – 27 , 33 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 48 , 51 ].…”