Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_4421_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
63 Мб
Скачать
Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
247
16
The adenoids are a collection of lymphoid tissue located on the posterior wall of the nasopharynx. They are part of the circle of lymphoid tissue known as “Waldeyer’s ring,” which includes the lingual and pala­tine tonsils. Adenoids typically grow until approxi­mately age 6 and then begin to regress, often disappearing completely by late adolescence or early adulthood. Adenoid hypertrophy is a common cause of nasal obstruction in children. A meta-analysis exclud­ing studies of children with overt obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) found that the prevalence of adenoid hypertrophy ranges from 42% to 71% [15].
16.3.2 Inammatory Factors
In addition to anatomic abnormalities, nasal obstruc­tion can be caused or exacerbated by various inflam­matory factors. The nasal airway is highly sensitive to inflammation, and variations in the level of inflammation with associated nasal congestion sig­nificantly impact nasal airflow. Epidemiologic stud­ies differ in their estimation of the prevalence of allergic rhinitis, but it is estimated to affect between 9% and 42% of the population [16]. Several inflam­matory factors associated with allergic rhinitis follow circadian cycles, include interferon gamma, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and IL-4, IL-1b, and IL-10 [17,
18]. Many factors upregulate during sleeping hours,
with peaks in the early morning worsening nasal obstruction. Some patients with allergies develop overreliance on topical decongestants such as oxy­metazoline, which can lead to a rebound congestion affect known as rhinitis medicamentosa, further worsening nasal breathing [19].
Several nonallergic rhinitis conditions exist. Vasomotor rhinitis is linked to autonomic dysfunction and causes nasal congestion triggered by odors, changes in temperature or pressure, or consumption of certain foods [20]. Pregnancy-induced rhinitis is caused by hor­monal effects on the nasal mucosa, affecting 7–9% of pregnant women [21]. Rhinitis is also associated with a variety of other systemic inammatory conditions, such as lupus, Sjogren’s syndrome, Churg Strauss syndrome, and others.
Nasal resistance also increases when moving from upright to supine positioning, common during sleep [22]. This is likely modulated in part by autonomic reexes triggered by pressure receptors at the body’s sur­face, but also by passive congestion of the nasal vascula­ture [23]. Patients who already experience congestion during the day are likely to have these effects magnied during sleep by the effects of gravity with increased vas­cular congestion within the nose.
16.3.3 The Eect oftheNasal Airway
onSleep andSleep Apnea
There is a well-established relationship between nasal congestion and poor sleep quality. Several large epide­miologic studies have shown that nasal obstruction, either due to anatomic constraints or inammatory dis­ease, is an independent risk factor for snoring and sleep apnea [24, 25, 26]. The link between these two entities is complex and multifactorial. The nose is the primary breathing pathway under normal conditions. Nasal breathing accounts for 92% of inhaled air while awake and 96% of inhaled air while asleep [27]. In healthy indi­viduals, nasal resistance accounts for 55–60% of total airway resistance [28]. This proportion can be signi­cantly impacted by nasal obstructive issues. Pharyngeal airway collapse has been approximated by many authors using a Starling resistor model. The pharynx is modeled as a homogenous hollow tube suspended between rigid upstream and downstream segments. Nasal airway resis­tance represents a partial obstruction at the aperture of the tube and the pharynx represents a collapsible down­stream segment connected to the rigid trachea. Increasing nasal resistance causes negative intraluminal pressure downstream, increasing the tendency of the pharynx to collapse [29, 30]. If nasal obstruction is severe enough, many individuals convert to oral respiration (i.e., mouth breathing). Experiments have demonstrated that oral breathing is physiologically disadvantageous, with upper airway resistance increasing 2.5-fold as compared to nasal breathing during sleep [31].
Induction of nasal obstruction has been shown to affect sleep quality in several studies. Regli etal. found that postoperative nasal packing increased the apnea­hypopnea index (AHI) of patients with OSA [32]. Other studies have demonstrated that experimentally packing the nares of healthy subjects increased their AHI, arousal index, and decreased total sleep time [33, 34]. However, Friedman et al. showed in 49 subjects with OSA that only those with mild sleep apnea had an increase in AHI with postoperative nasal packing as opposed to those with more severe disease [35]. Conversely, relieving nasal obstruction has been found to improve sleep quality. In a 2019 study, An etal. found that applying oxymetazoline before sleep in patients with OSA and chronic nasal congestion improved AHI, duration of REM sleep, and mean O2 saturation [36].
In addition to its role in physical resistance, studies suggest that sensorineural feedback from the nose affects breathing patterns during sleep. White etal. showed that administration of intranasal lidocaine with a deconges­tant signicantly increased AHI compared to saline and a decongestant (mean AHI: 25.8 vs 6.4, respectively) [37]. Nasal lidocaine has also been found to signicantly
248
W. C. Scott and D. T. Kent
16
.Table 16.1 Inammatory mediators and their effect on sleep
Mediator Effect on sleep Effect on
nasal airway obstruction
Histamine Involved in balance between
wakefulness and slow-wave activity during sleep through
receptors in the brain
H
1
CysLT
IL-1 Effects probably mediated in
IL-4
IL-10
TNF-α Probably mediated through
PGD
2
Bradykinin
Substance P
Adapted from Ferguson etal. (2004)
Slow-wave sleep
part through PGD non-REM sleep; associated with latency to sleep onset: latency to REM and REM duration
Associated with latency to sleep onset; latency to REM and REM duration
Associated with latency to sleep onset; latency to REM and REM duration
PGD
2
REM, non-REM
Latency to REM, arousing
effect
2
;
Slight
increase the length of apneic events by decreasing the arousal response to apnea [38]. In normal, awake breath­ing, the nasal route of breathing vs oral breathing lead to higher minute ventilation and respiratory rate. These dif­ferences are largely erased when topical anesthesia is applied to the upper airway, suggesting that nasal airow receptors help regulate respiratory rate [39]. Thus, the absence of airow due to nasal congestion may impair breathing through dysregulation of neural feedback mechanisms in addition to simple airway mechanics.
Allergy contributes to obstruction and can affect breathing during sleep through multiple mechanisms. In addition to mechanical obstructive effects, inamma­tory mediators associated with allergy are also associ­ated with poor sleep quality (. Tables 16.1 and . 16.2) [18]. Many medications for the treatment of allergic rhi­nitis bind central nervous system receptors related to sleep regulation, increasing the potential for sleep­related side effects. Oral antihistamines, the most com­monly used medication for treating allergic rhinitis, are highly effective in controlling sneezing and itching symptoms but reduce congestion less effectively, limiting their utility in decreasing nasal resistance during sleep [18]. Side effects of oral antihistamines can include
mouth dryness, which can exacerbate nighttime breath­ing difculties [40]. H1-receptor antagonists cause drowsiness in susceptible individuals and may be useful as a sleep aid but can result in undesirable sleep inertia. For this reason, many antihistamines are widely used as sleep aids despite lack of evidence supporting improve­ments in sleep quality. Conversely, systemic deconges­tant medications (e.g., pseudoephedrine) and beta agonists may cause or exacerbate insomnia [40].
There is also evidence that continuous positive air­way pressure (CPAP) therapy interacts negatively with allergy and sinonasal inammation. Alahmari et al. found that CPAP usage resulted in an upregulation of sinonasal inammatory markers and reduced mucocil­liary clearance [41]. Saka etal. also found that CPAP led to increased inammation and brosis in sinonasal mucosa based on tissue biopsies of 25 subjects [42].
16.4 Evaluation oftheNasal Airway
It is critical to assess history along with physical examina­tion in a patient with symptoms of nasal obstruction and SDB, as perception of nasal obstruction does not always directly correlate with physical exam ndings. Many patients experience obstructive symptoms of a waxing and waning nature. If a patient complains of nasal obstruction, historic information and exam ndings will inform whether it is secondary to anatomic abnormalities or inammatory factors and will directly impact manage­ment decisions. Additional testing, such as nasal endos­copy, imaging, or rhinomanometry, may provide additional information but are not always necessary.
Allergic rhinitis and other nasal inammatory disor­ders often include rhinorrhea in addition to obstructive symptoms. Many patients with allergic rhinitis are able to pinpoint seasonal variations in symptoms or known exposures which exacerbate symptoms. Patients with vasomotor rhinitis may describe atypical exacerbating factors which are not seasonal or associated with tradi­tional environmental triggers. Patients with perennial allergic rhinitis may not be able to describe any triggers at all. A good social history can clue a clinician into occupational exposures such as mold, sawdust, and industrial chemicals. A medication history can gather information regarding previously successful and unsuc­cessful therapies (and sometimes even the cause of pathology, as in rhinitis medicamentosa). Anatomic abnormalities tend to lead to obstruction that is con­stant rather than variable, and may be unilateral in nature. A history of trauma or prior surgery can also lead a clinician to more strongly consider anatomic obstruction in their diagnosis. Many patients experience their nasal obstruction only at night when supine, so questions should always include assessment of night­time symptoms. Validated questionnaires such as the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation and the
Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
. Table 16.2 Useful elements of the history and physical exam to evaluate nasal symptoms
and sleep
History
HPI-Assess chronicity, seasonality, duration, severity
PMH-History of facial trauma
SH -Smoking
249
of obstruction
-Unilateral vs bilateral
-Nighttime vs daytime symptoms
-Associated rhinorrhea?
-Alleviating or relieving factors? (potential
allergens, medication usage)
-History of nasal surgery
-Allergy testing
-Occupation (exposure to mold, sawdust, industrial chemicals)
16
Physical Exam
External nasal examination-Note position of nasal cartilages and dorsum
Anterior rhinoscopy -Assess septal position
HPI History of Present Illness; PMH Past Medical History; SH Social History.
Sinonasal Questionnaire can help quantify symptom severity (. Figs.16.5 and 16.6) [43, 44].
Physical examination will include a careful examina­tion of the external nose before assessment of the nasal airway, including the position of the nasal dorsum and nasal cartilages. Anterior rhinoscopy can be performed with a nasal speculum. Assessment of the anterior nasal septum and location of deviation, if present, may be useful in surgical planning. The turbinate mucosa may appear boggy and inamed in an allergic patient during anterior rhinoscopy. Dynamic maneuvers, such as the modied Cottle maneuver, provide important informa­tion regarding nasal valve structural support if suspicion is raised for dynamic valve collapse during quiet respi­ration. First, the patient is asked to inspire gently and the external nasal wall is observed carefully for dynamic collapse. Then, to perform the modied Cottle maneu­ver, a small instrument or cotton-tipped applicator is used to support the nasal sidewall medially while the patient repeats the exam. Relief of symptoms suggests that nasal valve collapse may be contributing to their symptoms [45]. The Cottle maneuver is performed simi­larly, except that instead of using an instrument to sup­port the nasal valve from the inside, a nger is pressed laterally to the alar skin to draw the nasal sidewall open.
-Cottle/Modied Cottle for assessment of nasal valves
-Note character of nasal mucosa
Signicant improvement in inspiration with this maneu­ver may increase suspicion of static valve collapse.
Nasal endoscopy helps to further characterize anat­omy in many cases. A rigid endoscope is passed through the nare after application of topical decongestant and anesthetic. Initial nasal examination should be com­pleted prior to administration of medication, as this may mask inammatory conditions such as inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Nasal endoscopy allows for evaluation of more posterior structures, such as the middle turbinates, the posterior aspect of the inferior trubinates, and the posterior septum. It may help identify sinonasal polyps, adenoid hypertrophy, or other obstructing masses not easily visualized on anterior rhinoscopy.
Sinus computed tomography imaging helps to objec­tively characterize the bony anatomy of the nose and paranasal sinuses. Soft tissue lateral neck roentgeno­grams may be useful for assessing adenoid hypertrophy in children intolerant of ber optic endoscopy.
Acoustic rhinometry is a diagnostic tool that mea­sures reected soundwaves to generate information about the internal geometry of the nose [46]. It has the advantage of being relatively noninvasive and requires minimal participation from subjects such as children who may not cooperate with endoscopy or imaging.
250
Over the past 1 month, how much of a problem were the following conditions for you?
problem
3.
4.
nose during exercise or exertion
Over the last 3 months how often, on average, did you have the following symptoms?
Score reported as average of items: range of possible scores 0 - 3.
W. C. Scott and D. T. Kent
. Fig. 16.5 The Sinonasal
Questionnaire
. Fig. 16.6 The NOSE survey
Never 1 - 4 times
Runny Nose
Post nasal drip
Need to blow your nose
Facial pain/pressure
Nasal obstruction
Scoring: Never (0), 1 -4 times per month (1), 2- 6 times per week (2), and daily (3).
1. Nasal congestion or stuness
per month
Please circle the most correct response
Not a problem
0
2 - 6 times per month
very mild problem
1
moderate
problem
2
Daily
fairly bad
problem
3
severe
4
2. Nasal blockage or obstruction
Trouble breathing through my nose
Trouble sleeping
5. Unable to get enough air through my
16
Rhinomanometry is a technique which uses pressure transducers and a facemask to objectively measure nasal airow [47]. Both techniques require equipment beyond that routinely used in clinical practice, but they may be useful adjuncts to the evaluation of nasal obstruction in select patients.
16.4.1 Medical Treatment for Nasal
Obstruction
Many allergic patients can reduce nasal congestion symptoms with stimulus avoidance strategies. For those who cannot, there are many oral and topical therapies available for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids are the current gold standard of medical therapy. In a 2016 meta-analysis, Liu etal. analyzed ve double-blind randomized controlled trials that com-
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
pared intranasal steroids (either uticasone or mometa­sone) against a saline spray placebo in patients with OSA with AHI as the primary outcome. Results showed a statistically signicant but clinically minimal change in AHI.The mean difference in AHI was 0.95 (95% CI
1.42 to 0.47) based on pooled results from 221 patients (. Fig.16.7) [48]. In a 2013 prospective cohort study, Lavigne etal. reported that supine AHI and base­line blood oxygen saturation improved in 34 patients with OSA and allergic rhinitis treated with intranasal steroids, compared with no change in a cohort with OSA but no allergic rhinitis [49]. While the objective data suggest that nasal corticosteroid treatment has minimal impact, several studies suggest that the impact on subjective sleep quality may be greater. In 2010, Meltzer et al. published a double-blind parallel study comparing intranasal corticosteroid with saline spray and found improvements in sleep quality using the
Intranasal corticosteroid
Placebo Std. Mean Difference Std. Mean Difference
Favors corticosteroidFavors placebo
Study or subgroup
TreatmentControl
Std. mean dierenceStd. mean dierence
Favors [treatment]Favors [control]
Amaro et al. 2012
Djupesland et al. 2001
Schonhof
Pe
Bahammam et al. 1999
Gosepath et al. 199
Hostein et al. 199
Met
Kerr et al. 1992
T
Heterogeneit T
Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
251
16
Study or Subgroup
Acar 2013 Brouillette 2001
Chan 2015 Kheirandish-Gozal 2008 Kiely 2004
Total (95% CI) 118 103 100.0%
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.18; Chi2 = 10.49, df = 4 (P = 0.03); I2 = 62% Test for overall effect: Z = 3.91 (P < 0.0001)
Mean SD SDTotal TotalMean
-1.43
-2.4
-13.85
-5
-1
2.209811
3.6056
1.8195
1.833
20.3574
20
-0.145 13 24 48 13
2.2
0.4
1.1 0
0.643571
11.4315
2.6576
2.2627
20.3574
WeightIV. Random. 95% CI IV. Random. 95% CI
20
20.5%
12
16.5%
26
22.4%
32
23.5%
13
17.2%
-0.77 [-1.42, -0.13]
-0.84 [-1.66, -0.01]
-0.60 [-1.17, -0.03]
-1.72 [-2.24, -1.20]
-0.66 [-1.45, 0.13]
-0.95 [-1.42, -0.47]
-2
-1 0
. Fig. 16.7 Meta-analysis of the effect of intranasal corticosteroids vs placebo on apnea-hypopnea index from Liu etal. [48]
Mean MeanSD SDTotal Total
39
12.2
er et al. 2000
vernagie et al. 2000
es et al. 1992
otal (95% CI)
y: r2 = 0.42, χ2 = 32.91, df = 8 (p < 0.0001), I2 = 76%
est for overall: Z = 0 .43 (p = 0.67)
36.1
6
7.4
9
26.3
33.9
3
44
56.9
15
12
38
1.7
18
8.7
20.1
26
37.4
1
12
2.1
18
8.9
23
26
31.7
22.9
15
35.5
40
37.1
147147
46
10
10
57.8
Weight
10.7%
12
14
10.2%
18
1.2
18.3
26
12.6%
1
6
1.9
24
29.8
39
35.8
10.7%
12
11.6%
18
12.6%
26
11.3%
15
10.1%
10
10.1%
10
100.0%
IV, random, 95% CI IV, random, 95% CI
0.07 [–0.73, 0.87]
2.33 [1.46, 3.19]
–0.07 [–0.61, 0.48]
0.00 [–0.80, 0.80]
–0.73 [–1.41, –0.05]
–0.23 [–0.77, 0.32]
–0.06 [–0.77, 0.66]
–0.05 [–0.93, 0.83]
–0.02 [–0.90, 0.85]
0.11 [–0.38, 0.60]
Year
2012
2001
2000
2000
1999
1999
1993
1992
1992
–2 –1
0 12
1
2
Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) (1.82 vs 0.6), the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) (1.9 vs +0.44), and reported fewer hours missed and less daily activity impairment on the Work­Productivity and Activities Impairment-Allergy Specic score (WPAI-AS). This study also measured AHI and did not note a statistically signicant difference in the intervention group, although no subjects with an AHI over 20 were included [50]. In 2005, Craig et al. pub­lished pooled data from three double-blinded placebo­controlled crossover studies on patients with allergic rhinitis and associated sleep symptoms. Of note, all three studies excluded subjects with OSA [51].
an alternative or adjunct to nasal corticosteroids in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. In a double-blinded cross­over study, topical azelastine was compared to saline in subjects with allergic rhinitis and SDB. Subjects in the azelastine group reported subjectively improved sleep, but no improvements in daytime somnolence or conges­tion [52]. In another trial, Santos etal. found that the use of the leukotriene inhibitor montelukast led to sub­jective improvement in sleep quality as measured by sev­eral validated scales including the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), the ESS, the Calgary
. Fig. 16.8 Forrest plot showing the effect of nasal dilators on apnea-hypopnea index from a meta-analysis by Camacho etal. [54]
Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index in subjects with perennial allergic rhinitis [53].
Available clinical data support medical treatment in patients with SDB and allergic rhinitis. In particular, the use of nasal corticosteroids signicantly improves sub­jective sleep symptoms, and may also have a modest effect on AHI and objective measures of sleep quality. Other medical allergy treatment may also be benecial, but further research is needed to dene the role of these medications in managing sleep symptoms.
Nonsurgical treatment of nasal obstruction in SDB is possible with the use of nasal dilators. Nasal dilators are noninvasive, externally applied devices meant to
Topical nasal antihistamines are often prescribed as
stent open the nasal valves. While they are occasionally cumbersome to wear during wakeful activities, they can be more easily tolerated by many sleeping patients. In a 2016 meta-analysis, Camacho etal. examined 147 sub­jects from 14 studies using either internal or external nasal dilators and reported that there was no signicant difference in AHI, lowest O
saturation, or snoring
2
index. There was a small decrease in AI (apnea index) with the use of internal dilators (4.87 events/hr. vs 0.64 events/hr.) (. Fig. 16.8) [54]. In a 2018 randomized controlled trial using two types of external dilators, both types were found to be superior to a sham dilator in
252
W. C. Scott and D. T. Kent
16
improving sleep quality based on the Pittsburgh Insomnia Rating Scale (PIRS), Nocturnal Rhino con­junctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (NRQLQ) [55].
16.4.2 Nasal Surgery intheManagement
ofSleep-Disordered Breathing
Medical management of inammatory disorders is inex­pensive, has a favorable risk prole, and may obviate the need for surgical correction of observed structural abnormalities if patient symptoms sufciently improve. However, in many cases, correction of anatomic causes of restricted nasal airow requires surgical intervention. The surgical management of nasal obstruction is com­plex, and interventions must be tailored to the individ­ual patient’s anatomy. The evidence regarding nasal surgery and SDB comes primarily from retrospective observational cohorts due to the ethical concerns pres­ent in randomizing patients to alternative or sham surgi­cal comparators.
16.5 Surgical Techniques toAddress Nasal
Obstruction
The specic techniques of nasal surgery to address obstruction are varied, nuanced, and beyond the scope of this chapter. However, it is crucial to have a basic understanding of available interventions and procedural selection. Septoplasty with or without treatment of infe­rior turbinate hypertrophy is the most commonly per­formed surgery for nasal obstruction and is perhaps the best studied with regard to SDB.In general, septoplasty involves elevation of the septal mucosa from the carti­laginous and bony septum, with removal or reposition­ing of the deviated portions. A dorsal and caudal strut of cartilage are preserved or constructed to ensure struc­tural integrity of the nose, avoiding any signicant change in external appearance. Turbinate reduction is a technique that involves reducing the size of the soft tis­sue covering the turbinates with a microdebrider or radiofrequency ablation and is often combined with sur­gical out fracture of the turbinate bones. This can be achieved in the operating room or in the ofce setting under local anesthesia in appropriately selected patients.
In patients with external nasal deformities, func­tional rhinoplasty with or without septoplasty may be performed. Functional rhinoplasty encompasses a vari­ety of techniques with the goal of surgical modication of the external cartilages and bones of the nose, often with the intention of augmenting the cross-sectional area or rigidity of the internal and external nasal valve.
Adenoidectomy is a commonly performed procedure that involves surgically removing obstructive adenoid
tissue using various techniques, including electrocau­tery, micro debridement, or cold steel. Functional endo­scopic sinus surgery (FESS) involves using an endoscopic camera and instruments to correct bony anatomy in the sinus cavities in such a way as to optimize sinonasal drainage and remove inammatory disease that is refrac­tory to medical management. Additional structural anomalies directly obstructing nasal airow, such as concha bullosa or nasal polyposis, can also be corrected during FESS.Any of these procedures can be performed alone, but are often performed in various combinations for patients with multifactorial anatomic obstruction.
16.6 Evidence forNasal Surgery in
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Available data suggest that nasal surgeries often improve subjective sleep quality but do not reliably improve objec­tive polysomnographic metrics of SDB.However, correc­tion of nasal obstruction may signicantly improve the ability of patients to tolerate CPAP, the rst-line treat­ment for OSA.A large meta-analysis regarding the effect of nasal surgery on AHI and subjective sleep quality analyzed 225 subjects across 10 retrospective cohort studies. Surgical interventions were diverse and included turbinate reduction alone, septoplasty combined with turbinate reduction, and “any combination of septo­plasty, turbinate reduction, nasal valve reconstruction, and endoscopic sinus surgery.” No statistically signicant difference in AHI was observed, but statistically signi­cant improvements in the respiratory disturbance index and subjective sleepiness symptoms were observed (RDI:
11.06 events/hr., 95% CI [5.92, 16.19]; ESS -3.53, 95% CI [0.64, 6.23]), (. Fig. 16.9) [56]. A previous meta-analysis by Li and colleagues reported similar nd­ings [57]. Other observational studies further support the impact of nasal surgery on subjective sleep quality. Li etal. found that disease-specic quality of life was sig­nicantly improved in patients undergoing septoplasty based on the Snore Outcomes Survey and the ESS, as did Ertugay etal. in a similar study [58, 59].
More recent data suggest that there may be sub­groups of patients that achieve signicant improvements in objective polysomnography metrics with nasal sur­gery. Shuaib et al. reported a statistically signicant decrease in AHI of 35% after functional rhinoplasty (24.7 to 16), which increased to 57% when patients with a BMI over 30 were excluded (22.5 to 9.6) [60]. In 2015, Hisamatst etal. reported a signicant reduction in AHI after patients with OSA and nasal obstruction under­went combination septoplasty and posterior neurec­tomy, a procedure to reduce nasal inammation by resecting the vidian nerve (12.46 in severe OSA and  7.86 in moderate OSA) [61]. In a Norwegian
Dierence [95% CI]
Dierence
Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
253
16
. Fig. 16.9 Forrest plot
showing pre- and post-operative apnea- hypopnea index after nasal surgery from a meta-analysis by Ishii etal. [56]
Authors & Year
Virkkula et al, 2006
Nakata et al, 2008
Park et al, 2014
Verse et al, 2002
Bican et al, 2010
Koutsoureklakis et al, 2008
Bayesian RE Model
Bayesian FE Model
1.44 [–5.70, 8.40]
3.40 [–3.82, 10.45]
8.97 [2.43, 15.53]
3.99 [–5.02, 12.80]
9.20 [–0.59, 21.70]
1.97 [–4.46, 8.50]
4.83 [–1.60, 11.62]
4.75 [0.55, 8.99]
–10.00 0.00 10.00 20.00
cohort study of 78 patients, Moxness et al. found a highly statistically signicant improvement in ESS after nasal surgery (8.94 vs 10.74; p<0.01). This study did not nd a statistically signicant change in AHI with nasal surgery overall, but in post-hoc subgroup analysis found a statistically signicant decrease in AHI in patients undergoing combination septoplasty and turbinate reduction (17.4 to 11.7; p<0.01) [62]. Recent studies in South Korea and China have also showed statistically signicant decreases in AHI after nasal surgery [63, 64].
The effect of nasal surgery on AHI is varied and inconclusive. There may be select groups of patients that experience signicant improvements in objective mea­sures of OSA disease burden, but these subgroups have yet to be clearly identied. However, available evidence does suggest that nasal surgery may improve subjective sleep quality and daytime sleepiness.
There is also convincing evidence that nasal surgery may help reduce CPAP pressure requirements and improve CPAP compliance. CPAP is the rst-line treat­ment for OSA, but adherence rates pose a signicant problem with estimates of nonadherence ranging from 46% to 83% [65]. A meta-analysis by Camacho etal. in 2015 examined 279 patients across 18 studies reporting CPAP data before and after isolated nasal surgery. Nasal surgery resulted in a statistically signicant decrease in mean therapeutic pressures from 11.6 ± 2.2 to
9.5±2.0cm H
O.Following nasal surgery, CPAP com-
2
pliance improved from 38.7% to 89.1% postoperatively [66]. A cost–benet analysis of nasal surgery to improve
CPAP compliance concluded it is a cost-effective strat­egy when weighed against the cost of untreated sleep apnea (. Table16.3.) [67].
16.7 Evidence forNasal Surgery inPrimary
Snoring
There has also been extensive investigation into the effect of nasal surgery on primary snoring. Several stud­ies assessing snoring objectively through audio record­ings have not shown a signicant decrease in the duration or intensity of snoring [68, 69]. An exception is Choi et al., who found a small but statistically signicant reduction in snoring duration after nasal surgery of any kind including FESS, septoplasty, and/or turbinate reduction surgery (32.2±16.4% to 25.8±18.6% of the night spent snoring) [70]. Most studies on snoring after nasal surgery report subjective assessments from patients or sleep partners (.
In contrast to adults, adenotonsillectomy is consid­ered a rst-line treatment for OSA in children. Isolated adenoidectomy is often performed when nasal obstruc­tion is a primary complaint and evidence suggests it may be effective in improving AHI in OSA [75, 76]. Domany etal. found that adenoidectomy alone produced similar long-term subjective symptomatic improvement mea­sured with the Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire (PSQ) as compared to adenotonsillectomy in nonobese children under the age of 7 [77].
Table16.4) [71, 72, 73, 58, 74].
254
W. C. Scott and D. T. Kent
500 668.07 787.13
1,000 752.10 1,183.17
2,000 920.17 1,975.25
5,000 1,424.37 4,351.49
16
. Table 16.3. Theorized cost savings per quality of life year of performing septoplasty or turbinate reduction on patients with OSA based on a model developed by Kempe etal.
[67]. Model results are reported with assumed cost of untreated OSA (Cost OSA ($)) values ranging from 500 to 5000
Table I Cost QALY Saved With Nasal Surgen
5 years Cost ($) QALY 5 years Cost (S) QALY
Septoplasty Turbinate Reduction
a
500 1,823.53 618.81
Cost OSA (S) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30% Cost OSA ($) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30%
a
a
1,000 1,907.56 1,051.98
a
2,000 2,075.63 1,918.32
5,000 2,579.83 4,517.33
10 years Cost ($) QALY 10 years Cost (S) QALY
500 1,174.37 1,383.66 500 596.64 702.97
Cost OSA (S) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30% Cost OSA (S) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30%
1,000 1,258.40 1,779.70 1,000 680.67 1,099.01
2,000 1,426.47 2,571.78 2,000 848.74 1,891.09
5,000 1,930.67 4,948.02 5,000 1,352.94 4,267.33
15 years Cost (S) QALY 15 years Cost (S) QALY
500 957.98 1,128.71 500 572.83 674.92
Cost OSA (S) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30% Cost OSA (S) pCPAP 70% pCPAP 30%
1,000 1,014.01 1,524.75 1,000 656.86 1,070.96
2,000 1,210.08 2,316.83 2,000 824.93 1,863.04
5,000 1,714.29 4,693.07 5,000 1,329.13 4,239.27
Only septoplasty within the 5-year time frame is not cost- effective; at all other times, nasal surgery is favored (WTP = $50,000)
OSA obstructive sleep apnea, pCPAP probability of continuous positive airway pressure compliance, QALY quality- adjusted life year, WTP willingness to pay
a
Calculations were made for two base populations with different pCPAP, 30% or 70%, and for time frames 5, 10, and 15 years
Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
255
16
. Table 16.4 Subjective snoring outcomes after nasal
surgery
Study Authors
Suoğlu etal. [71]
Friedman etal. (2007)
Cigdem etal. (2015)
Li etal. (2009)
Intervention Patient
population
“nasal surgery” not specied
Septoplasty ± BITSMR ± FESS
Septoplasty 64 patients
Septoplasty 52 patients
31 patients with OSAS and conrmed nasal pathology on PE
50 patients with OSAS undergoing nasal surgery
with self-reported snoring and septal deviation
with OSAS and septal deviation
Subjective outcomes
Snoring on VA S
4.9 ± 2.3 from
8.6 ± 2.3 p <0.001
17/50 patients noted improvement or resolution of snoring
Snore symptom inventory mean 25.61 from 58.14 p <0.001
Snore outcome survey 41.5 ±
9.7 from 60.7 ±
14.4 p<0.001 Spouse/Bed Partner Survey
39.7 ± 18.7 from 60.3 ±
21.5 p<0.001
Professional societies inconsistently recognize the utility and importance of nasal surgery in the manage­ment of SDB. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine produced a clinical practice guideline for the surgical management of sleep apnea in 2010, which did not specically evaluate nasal surgery outcomes [78]. In contrast, an American Academy of Otolaryngology— Head and Neck Surgery position statement emphasizes the importance of nasal surgery for improvement in sleep quality and improvement of PSG metrics in a sub­set of patients [79].

16.8 Summary

Nasal obstruction and SDB are intimately linked. The relationship between the nose and sleep is complex and is affected by airway mechanics, sensorineural feedback loops, medical therapies, and inammatory factors. Nasal obstruction is often multifactorial and can consist of inammatory factors such as allergy, anatomic limi­tations, or a combination of both. Any patient who presents with sleep complaints should be assessed for
nasal obstruction with a directed history and a physical examination that includes anterior rhinoscopy, with additional diagnostic evaluation modalities applied as indicated.
In symptomatic patients, there is signicant evidence that medical treatment for allergy, especially with intra­nasal corticosteroids, can improve subjective sleep qual­ity and may even modestly improve AHI. In some patients, especially those with obstructive symptoms refractory to medical treatment, nasal surgery should be considered. Evidence suggests that nasal surgery may not reliably improve AHI in patients with OSA, but it often improves daytime somnolence, subjective sleep quality, and CPAP tolerance and therapeutic pressures. Further research is needed to determine which surgical interventions are most effective in treating SDB and which patients stand to benet the most from nasal sur­gery. Management of nasal obstruction in patients with SDB is an essential component of a comprehensive treatment strategy.

References

1. Young T, Finn L, Kim H. Nasal obstruction as a risk factor for sleep-disordered breathing. The University of Wisconsin Sleep and Respiratory Research Group. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1997;99(2):S757–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0091-6749(97)70124-6.
2. Bridger GP, Proctor DF.Maximum nasal inspiratory ow and nasal resistance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1970;79(3):481–8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000348947007900308.
3. Howard BK, Rohrich RJ.Understanding the nasal airway: princi­ples and practice. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109(3):1128–46.; quiz 1145-1146. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200203000-00054.
4. Tarabichi M, Fanous N.Finite element analysis of airow in the nasal valve. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993;119(6):638–
42. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1993.01880180054010.
5. Bloching MB.Disorders of the nasal valve area. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;6. https://www. ncbi.
nlm. nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC3199841/. Accessed 8 Sept 2019.
6. Liu P, Jiao D, Wang X, Liu J, Martin D, Guo J.Changes in maxil­lary width and upper airway spaces in young adults after surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion with surgically facilitated orth­odontic therapy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2019;127(5):381–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2018.11.005.
7. Bruintjes TD, van Olphen AF, Hillen B, Huizing EH.A functional anatomic study of the relationship of the nasal cartilages and mus­cles to the nasal valve area. Laryngoscope. 1998;108(7):1025–32.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-199807000-00014.
8. Sheen JH. Spreader graft: a method of reconstructing the roof of the middle nasal vault following rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984;73(2):230–9.
9. Khosh MM, Jen A, Honrado C, Pearlman SJ.Nasal valve recon­struction: experience in 53 consecutive patients. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004;6(3):167–71. https://doi.org/10.1001/arch-
faci.6.3.167.
10. Mladina R, Cujić E, Subarić M, Vuković K.Nasal septal defor­mities in ear, nose, and throat patients: an international study. Am J Otolaryngol. 2008;29(2):75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
amjoto.2007.02.002.
256
W. C. Scott and D. T. Kent
16
11. Teixeira J, Certal V, Chang ET, Camacho M.Nasal Septal devia­tions: a systematic review of classication systems. Plast Surg Int. 2016;2016:7089123. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7089123.
12. Neskey D, Eloy JA, Casiano RR.Nasal, septal, and turbinate anat­omy and embryology. Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2009;42(2):193–
205., vii. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2009.01.008.
13. Nurse LA, Duncavage JA. Surgery of the inferior and middle turbinates. Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2009;42(2):295–309., ix.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2009.01.009.
14. Stallman JS, Lobo JN, Som PM. The incidence of concha bullosa and its relationship to nasal septal deviation and parana­sal sinus disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004;25(9):1613–8.
15. Pereira L, Monyror J, Almeida FT, etal. Prevalence of adenoid hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev. 2018;38:101–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2017.06.001.
16. Settipane RA, Charnock DR.Epidemiology of rhinitis: allergic and nonallergic. Clin Allergy Immunol. 2007;19:23–34.
17. Craig T, Mccann J, Gurevich F, Davies M.The correlation between allergic rhinitis and sleep disturbance. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004;114:S139–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2004.08.044.
18. Ferguson BJ.Inuences of allergic rhinitis on sleep. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(5):617–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
otohns.2004.02.001.
19. Zucker SM, Barton BM, McCoul ED.Management of Rhinitis Medicamentosa: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;160(3):429–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599818807891.
20. Pattanaik D, Lieberman P. Vasomotor rhinitis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2010;10(2):84–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-
010-0089-z.
21. Ellegård EK. Pregnancy rhinitis. Immunol Allergy Clin N Am. 2006;26(1):119–35., vii. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iac.2005.10.007.
22. Toh S-T, Lin C-H, Guilleminault C.Usage of four-phase high­resolution rhinomanometry and measurement of nasal resis­tance in sleep-disordered breathing. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(10):2343–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23441.
23. Strohl KP, Butler JP, Malhotra A.Mechanical properties of the upper airway. Compr Physiol. 2012;2(3):1853–72. https://doi.
org/10.1002/cphy.c110053.
24. Stradling JR, Crosby JH.Predictors and prevalence of obstruc­tive sleep apnoea and snoring in 1001 middle aged men. Thorax. 1991;46(2):85–90. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.46.2.85.
25. Young T, Finn L, Palta M.Chronic nasal congestion at night is a risk factor for snoring in a population-based cohort study. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(12):1514–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/
archinte.161.12.1514.
26. Lofaso F, Coste A, d’Ortho MP, etal. Nasal obstruction as a risk factor for sleep apnoea syndrome. Eur Respir J. 2000;16(4):639–
43. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3003.2000.16d12.x.
27. Fitzpatrick MF, Driver HS, Chatha N, Voduc N, Girard AM.Partitioning of inhaled ventilation between the nasal and oral routes during sleep in normal subjects. J Appl Physiol. 2003;94(3):883–90. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00658.2002.
28. Ferris BG, Mead J, Opie LH. Partitioning of respiratory ow resistance in man. J Appl Physiol. 1964;19(4):653–8. https://doi.
org/10.1152/jappl.1964.19.4.653.
29. Park SS.Flow-regulatory function of upper airway in health and disease: a unied pathogenetic view of sleep-disordered breath­ing. Lung. 1993;171(6):311–33.
30. Smith PL, Wise RA, Gold AR, Schwartz AR, Permutt S.Upper airway pressure-ow relationships in obstructive sleep apnea. J Appl Physiol. 1988;64(2):789–95. https://doi.org/10.1152/
jappl.1988.64.2.789.
31. Fitzpatrick MF, McLean H, Urton AM, Tan A, O’Donnell D, Driver HS.Effect of nasal or oral breathing route on upper air­way resistance during sleep. Eur Respir J. 2003;22(5):827–32.
https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.03.00047903.
32. Regli A, von Ungern-Sternberg BS, Strobel WM, Pargger H, Welge-Luessen A, Reber A.The impact of postoperative nasal packing on sleep-disordered breathing and nocturnal oxygen saturation in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Anesth Analg. 2006;102(2):615–20. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.
ane.0000184814.57285.5b.
33. Lavie P, Fischel N, Zomer J, Eliaschar I.The effects of partial and complete mechanical occlusion of the nasal passages on sleep structure and breathing in sleep. Acta Otolaryngol. 1983;95(1–
2):161–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016488309130930.
34. Suratt PM, Turner BL, Wilhoit SC.Effect of intranasal obstruc­tion on breathing during sleep. Chest. 1986;90(3):324–9. https://
doi.org/10.1378/chest.90.3.324.
35. Friedman M, Maley A, Kelley K, etal. Impact of nasal obstruc­tion on obstructive sleep apnea. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011;144(6):1000–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599811400977.
36. An Y, Li Y, Kang D, etal. The effects of nasal decongestion on obstructive sleep apnoea. Am J Otolaryngol. 2019;40(1):52–6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2018.08.003.
37. White DP, Cadieux RJ, Lombard RM, Bixler EO, Kales A, Zwillich CW.The effects of nasal anesthesia on breathing during sleep. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1985;132(5):972–5. https://doi.
org/10.1164/arrd.1985.132.5.972.
38. Berry RB, Kouchi KG, Bower JL, Light RW. Effect of upper airway anesthesia on obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995;151(6):1857–61. https://doi.org/10.1164/
ajrccm.151.6.7767531.
39. Douglas NJ, White DP, Weil JV, Zwillich CW.Effect of breathing route on ventilation and ventilatory drive. Respir Physiol. 1983;51(2):209–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-5687(83)90041-5.
40. Kent DT, Soose RJ.Environmental factors that can affect sleep and breathing: allergies. Clin Chest Med. 2014;35(3):589–601.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccm.2014.06.013.
41 . Alahmari MD, Sapsford RJ, Wedzicha JA, Hurst JR.Dose response
of continuous positive airway pressure on nasal symptoms, obstruc­tion and inammation in vivo and in vitro. Eur Respir J. 2012;40(5):1180–90. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00199911.
42. Saka C, Vuralkan E, Fırat IH, etal. The effects of CPAP treat­ment on nasal mucosa in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;269(9):2065–7. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00405-011-1906-2.
43. Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT.Development and validation of the nasal obstruction symp­tom evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(2):157–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016.
44. Dixon AE, Sugar EA, Zinreich SJ, etal. Criteria to screen for chronic sinonasal disease. Chest. 2009;136(5):1324–32. https://
doi.org/10.1378/chest.08-1983.
45. Fung E, Hong P, Moore C, Taylor SM. The effectiveness of modied cottle maneuver in predicting outcomes in functional rhinoplasty. Plast Surg Int. 2014;2014:618313. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2014/618313.
46. Roithmann R, Cole P, Chapnik J, Shpirer I, Hoffstein V, Zamel N.Acoustic rhinometry in the evaluation of nasal obstruction. Laryngoscope. 1995;105(3 Pt 1):275–81. https://doi.
org/10.1288/00005537-199503000-00010.
47. Cole P, Fenton RS. Contemporary rhinomanometry. J Otolaryngol. 2006;35(2):83–7.
48. Liu H-T, Lin Y-C, Kuan Y-C, et al. Intranasal Corticosteroid Therapy in the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Meta­Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2016;30(3):215–21. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2016.30.4305.
49. Lavigne F, Petrof BJ, Johnson JR, etal. Effect of topical cortico­steroids on allergic airway inammation and disease severity in obstructive sleep apnoea. Clin Exp Allergy. 2013;43(10):1124–
33. https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.12158.