Abstract
Background
There have been many studies in the literature describing the techniques, the associated comorbidities and the outcomes related to septoplasty and septorhinoplasty, while there have been few studies evaluating the effects of cigarette smoking on septorhinoplasty. The present study evaluates the effect of cigarette smoking on complication and revision rates and compares the functional results of smoking and non-smoking patients.
Method
The data of 598 patients were retrospectively analyzed, and the age, gender, cigarette smoking status, type of operation, NOSE scores, complications and revision rates were recorded. For the purpose of the study, three different patient groups were defined, being those who had never smoked, those who smoked in the past but had quit and active cigarette smokers. The preoperative and postoperative 6th month Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Questionnaire scores were compared, and the three groups were compared in terms of complications and the need for revision.
Results
No differences were identified in the complication rates or revision requirements of the three groups with different cigarette smoking statuses (p=0.17 and p=0.74, respectively). The NOSE scores of the surgery groups and cigarette smoking categories improved significantly after the operation (p=0.01). No difference was identified in the NOSE scores of the groups with different cigarette smoking statuses (p>0.05).
Conclusion
Active cigarette smoking has no effect on the functional results and rates of complication/revision after septoplasty or septorhinoplasty operation. That said, surgeons should suggest that patients quit smoking preoperatively in order to minimize the general systematic effects of cigarette smoking.
Level of Evidence IV
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sheen JH (1997) Closed versus open rhinoplasty–and the debate goes on. Plast Reconstr Surg 99(3):859–862
Coon D, Tuffaha S, Christensen J, Bonawitz SC (2013) Plastic surgery and smoking: a prospective analysis of incidence, compliance, and complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 131(2):385–391
Theocharidis V, Economopoulos KP (2014) Smoking cessation prior to elective plastic surgery: why, when and how? Tob Induc Dis 12(Suppl 1):A18
Prabhat J, Peto R (2014) Global effects of smoking, of quitting, and of taxing tobacco. N Engl J Med 370(1):60–68
Silverstein P (1992) Smoking and wound healing. Am J Med 93(1):22–24
Cuvas O, Er A, Ikeda OC, Dikmen B, Basar H (2008) Cigarette smoking and the haemodynamic response to tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia 63(5):463–466
Wong J, Lam DP, Abrishami A, Chan MTV, Chung F (2012) Short-term preoperative smoking cessation and postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth 59(1):268–279
Theocharidis V, Katsaros I, Sgouromallis E, Serifis N, Boikou V, Tasigiorgos S, Kokosis G, Economopoulos KP (2018) Current evidence on the role of smoking in plastic surgery elective procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71(5):624–636
Gibb C, Fitridge R (2018) Smoking and the surgeon: no more excuses. ANZ J Surg 88(9):815–816
Goldminz D, Bennett RG (1991) Cigarette smoking and flap and full-thickness graft necrosis. Arch Dermatol 127(7):1012–1015
Hwang K, Son JS, Ryu WK (2018) Smoking and flap survival. Plast Surg 26(4):280–285
Rohrich RJ, Coberly DM, Kreuger JK, Brown SA (2002) Planning elective operations on patients who smoke: survey of North American plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:350–355
Rudmik L, Mace JC, Smith TL (2011) Smoking and endoscopic sinus surgery; does smoking volume contribute to clinical outcome. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 1(2):145–152
Cetiner H, Cavusoglu I, Duzer S (2017) The effect of smoking on perforation development and healing after septoplasty. Am J Rhinol Allergy 31(1):63–65
Layliev J, Gupta V, Kaoutzanis C, Ganesh Kumar N, Winocour J, Grotting JC, Higdon KK (2017) Incidence and preoperative risk factors for major complications in aesthetic rhinoplasty: analysis of 4978 patients. Aesthet Surg J 37(7):757–767
Lindsay RW (2012) Disease-specific quality of life outcomes in functional rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 122(7):1480–1488
Yazici ZM, Sayin I, Erdim I, Gunes S, Kayhan FT (2015) The effect of tobacco smoking on septoplasty outcomes: a prospective controlled study. Hippokratia 19(3):219–224
Bilgen F, Ince B, Ural A, Bekerecioğlu M (2020) Disastrous complications following rhinoplasty: soft tissue defects. J Craniofac Surg 31(3):809–812
Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT (2004) Development and validation of the nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130(2):157–163
Kotzampasakis D, Delistathi T, Kotzampasakis S, Mantalos P (2019) Aesthetic rhinoplasty and nasal obstruction: presentation of results of a 100-patient study by using NOSE inventory. Aesthetic Plast Surg 43(2):428–436
Funding
None of the authors have a financial interest in any of the products, devices, or drugs mentioned in this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Also, none of the authors have a conflict of interest and disclosures.
Ethical approval
The study was approved by the Medical and Health Sciences Research Board and the Ethics Board of Baskent University (KA20/378).
Informed consent
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Erol, O., Koycu, A. The Effect of Smoking on Septoplasty and Septorhinoplasty Outcomes. Aesth Plast Surg 46, 1378–1384 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02683-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02683-9