{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04704752760441671, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02400384061449832, 'mean_word_length': 5.147492625368732, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Efficacy of Vidian Neurectomy and Posterior Nasal Neurectomy in the Management of Nonallergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review

Background Nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is characterized by rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and sneezing, in the absence of systemic sensitization to allergens. For cases refractory to medical therapy and conservative surgical interventions, more targeted procedures, such as endoscopic vidian neurectomy (EVN) and posterior nasal neurectomy (PNN), including surgical (SPNN) and cryoablative (CPNN) methods, may reduce symptoms of NAR. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy, side effect profile, and complication rate between EVN and PNN for NAR. Methods A systematic review of primary articles that reported original patient data for either EVN or PNN was conducted using Embase, Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane databases since 2006, according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome of the study was an improvement in NAR symptom severity. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative side effects or complications. Results In total, 58 articles met the search criteria with a total of 9 studies (including 2 RCTs) eligible for inclusion. There was a pooled sample of 229 NAR patients that underwent EVN (n = 65; 28.4%), SPNN (n = 50; 21.8%), or CPNN (n = 114; 49.8%). For all 3 techniques, there was a statistically significant improvement in nasal symptoms, particularly rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, and obstruction along with quality of life. Heterogeneity in outcome reporting prevented meta-analysis and direct comparison of efficacy. The pooled incidence of postoperative complications for EVN (n = 65), SPNN (n = 50), and CPNN (n = 70) was 30.8% versus 0% versus 2.9% for dry eye, 16.9% versus 0% versus 1.4% for palatal/cheek numbness, and 0% versus 6% versus 4.3% for bleeding. Conclusion EVN, SPNN, and CPNN are similarly efficacious for patients with NAR refractory to medical management. SPNN and CPNN are associated with lower rates of complications (dry eye and palatal/cheek numbness) compared with EVN.