Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07412340

Disarticulation Septoplasty Versus Classical Way

The objective of this study is to determine which of the two techniques (disarticulation septoplasty versus open surgery) offers the best functional results for correcting symptomatic deviations of the nasal septum.

More specifically it's about:

* Compare the improvement in respiratory symptoms between the two techniques * Analyze and compare complication rates between the two techniques * Evaluate patient satisfaction with aesthetic results (including columella deviation)

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

About this study

Nowadays, disarticulation septoplasty is recognized as an effective technique for correcting complex septal deviations. It allows better exposure of the nasal septum, which facilitates the correction of severe deformities and reduces post-operative complications. This method is often compared to open surgery, which remains a classic approach but perhaps less suited to cases of severe or complex deviations. This technique makes it possible to correct aesthetic deviations while improving the functional aspect avoiding an open path.

There are several questionnaires, particularly in the field of rhinology, to evaluate the results of this technique on nasal obstruction in an objective and subjective manner, therefore its impact on quality of life as well as its effectiveness on chronic nasal dysfunction caused by deviation of the nasal septum. In this study, in addition to nasal symptoms before and after surgery and postoperative complications, we chose to work with two scores; NOSE score as a valid, reliable and responsive self-report instrument to quantify subjective dysfunction related to nasal obstruction. The other score is NAFEQ score which makes it possible to evaluate the aesthetic and functional outcome after nasal reconstruction.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patient aged 18 and over
  • Patient undergoing a new disarticulation septoplasty, or an open approach for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum, confirmed by endoscopy
  • Patient operated between 01/01/2023 and 31/12/2025

Exclusion criteria

Patient undergoing surgery but with the following medical history (on the day of surgery):

  • Patient with septal perforations
  • Patient with previous nasal septum surgery or cosmetic rhinoplasty
  • Patient with allergic rhinitis
  • Patient with chronic sinusitis
  • Patient with concha bullosa
  • Refusal to participate

Treatment and study plan

Comparison of functional improvement in nasal breathing between the two techniques using questionnaires administered to patients by their practitioners in routine practice

Other

Comparison of functional improvement in nasal breathing between the two techniques using questionnaires administered to patients by their practitioners in routine practice

Primary outcomes

  1. To determine which of the two techniques (disarticulation septoplasty versus open surgery) offers the best functional results to correct symptomatic nasal septum deviations

    Time frame: Before and at least 3 months after the operation

    Comparison of functional improvement in nasal breathing between the two techniques (disarticulation septoplasty versus classic septoplasty), using the standardized NOSE score routinely completed by patients pre-operatively and then 3 months post-operation.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Compare the functional improvement between the two techniques, using a different tool

    Time frame: Before and at least 3 months after the operation

    The functional improvement in nasal breathing between the two techniques will also be assessed using the NAFEQ score, which is also routinely completed pre-operatively and then 3 months after the operation

  2. Compare the improvement in respiratory symptoms between the two techniques

    Time frame: Before and at least 3 months after the operation

    The improvement in patients' symptoms will be compared between the two techniques using the responses to the NOSE questionnaire and responses 1-6 of the NAFEQ questionnaire.

  3. Analyze and compare the complication rates between the two techniques

    Time frame: At day 15 and 3 months after the operation

    The number of the following complications will be compared between the two techniques: bleeding up to day 15, infections up to day 15, and septal perforations up to M3. These data will be available in the patient's medical record.

  4. Assess patient satisfaction with aesthetic results (including columellar deviation)

    Time frame: Before and at least 3 months after the operation

    Patient satisfaction with aesthetics will be measured using questions 8 to 14 of the NAFEQ questionnaire and then compared between the two techniques preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Mathilde WLODARCZYK

CONTACT

[email protected]

0033130754650

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hôpital NOVO

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Disarticulation Septoplasty Versus Classical Septoplasty: Retrospective Study

Acronym: DSARTICULATION

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
Feb 17, 2026
Registry last updated
Feb 19, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.