[Rhinomanometric analysis of vestibular stenoses of the nose]

The distinction of the resistance in the nasal vestibule (valve area) and cavity (turbinates, septum deviations, crest, spine) is important for the settlement of the operative course in nasally impaired patients. Collapsed valves, free floating polyps, spines, and other turbulence producing factors in the nose are characterized in active anterior rhinomanometry (AAR) as decreased ¿percentage of flow increase¿ (deltaV150-300). This parameter allows no distinction between underlying anatomical factors. Other patients have increased resistance in the vestibule area that is static; rhinomanometry is unable to document these instances. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the vestibule dilator on nasal flow, and to determine if the diagnostic findings of AAR could be improved by the data obtained from the measurement with the dilator.

To prove the influence of the vestibule dilator on the nasal airflow, we determined typical rhinomanometric parameters in 20 nasally healthy and 40 nasally impaired persons with and without the dilator. For the measurements, we used a computer-aided rhinomanometer (Rhinodat K, Heinemann Medizintechnik, D-Hamburg). Tubular vestibule dilators were produced from silicon guide rails of tracheal tubes (Rüschelit, Fa. Rüsch, D-Kernen) and individually adapted to the patient's vestibule, ensuring dilation between the external ostium and the nasal isthmus.

Active interior rhinomanometry revealed a significant effect of the vestibule dilator in repeated application (mean variation 3%). Total nasal flow showed a mean increase of about 48% with the dilator. In AAR, we found 5 patients with decreased deltaV150-300 below 25%. To demonstrate the presence of vestibule stenosis, we compared the changes of deltaV150-300 is AAR with and without dilator. In rhinomanometry with the dilator, deltaV150-300 of patients with vestibule stenosis showed physiological values. In these patients, mean difference of deltaV150-300 between conventional rhinomanometry and rhinomanometry with a vestibule dilator was significantly higher (47,2%) than observed in all other persons (3,8%). The static vestibule resistance in the total nasal resistance was obtained by calculating the difference between nasal flows with and without the dilator. CONCLUSIONS; Stenosis in the nasal vestibule could be proved and measured via active anterior rhinomanometry using a vestibule dilator. Data obtained from this method are helpful in functional assessment of nasally impaired patients, particularly to answer the question of whether the vestibule requires surgical treatment.