Objective
To create a clinical consensus statement to address ambiguities and disparities in the diagnosis and management of nasal valve compromise (NVC).
Methods
An updated systematic review of the literature was conducted. In addition, a Modified Delphi Method was used to refine expert opinion and facilitate a consensus position.
Results
After two rounds of surveys and conference calls, thirty six items reached consensus, six items reached near consensus, and ten items reached no consensus. The categories that had the greatest percentage of consensus or near consensus items were: definition, history and physical examination, outcome measures, and management. Conversely, the categories with greater percentage of no consensus items were: adjunctive tests and coding.
Conclusions
The consensus panel agreed that NVC is a distinct clinical entity that is best evaluated with history and physical exam findings. Endoscopy and photography are useful but not routinely indicated, while radiographic studies are not useful in evaluating NVC. Other objective nasal outcome measures may not be useful or accepted for NVC. Nasal steroid medication is not useful for treating NVC in the absence of rhinitis, and mechanical treatments may be useful in selected patients. Surgical treatment is the primary mode of treatment of NVC, but bill coding remains ambiguous and confusing.