Reply to “Inferior Turbinate Outfracture Alone Has Not Been Studied in Randomized Controlled Trials”

We thank Dr Man and Dr Schmale for their critical appraisal of our meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing inferior turbinoplasty techniques.1 Our meta-analysis sought to establish that turbinate reduction techniques that included either removal of tissue or outfracture provided longer-lasting relief of nasal obstruction than techniques which did not utilize these measures. As mentioned in our article, the data is very limited regarding long-term outcomes of inferior turbinate reduction techniques, especially regarding randomized controlled trials. The authors mention a concern with our conclusions, namely that inferior turbinate outfracture alone provided equal outcomes as microdebrider-assisted turbinate reduction or submucosal resection of inferior turbinate. In careful review of this concern, we can understand how Dr Man and Dr Schmale may have arrived at the conclusion that we were suggesting outfracture alone provides as long-lasting relief of nasal obstruction as tissue removal techniques; however, this was not our intent. Our intent was to demonstrate that based on the available literature, procedures involving removal of tissue or in combination with outfracture have longer-lasting results than those that do not remove tissue or outfracture. Upon careful review of our manuscript, we now understand that the wording within the results and table sections may be confusing to readers and lead them to similar conclusions, so we thank Dr Man and Dr Schmale for bringing this to our attention and providing the opportunity to provide clarity. Regarding the long-term outcome data supplied by Liu et al and Chen et al, we thank the authors for their thoughtful analysis.2, 3 The concerns mentioned by the authors work to further highlight the need for more randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up in outcomes, as there is scarce literature available to support different techniques. The views expressed in this invited response are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Defense Health Agency, Department of Defense, nor the US Government. Nolan N. Jones, MD, drafted, reviewed, edited and approved final manuscript; Sungjin A. Song, MD, reviewed, edited, and approved final manuscript; Macario Camacho, MD, reviewed, edited, and approved final manuscript. None. None.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Otolaryngology
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ohn.70223
Primary Topic
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reply to “Inferior Turbinate Outfracture Alone Has Not Been Studied in Randomized Controlled Trials”

Nolan Jones, Sungjin A. Song, Macario Camacho
Otolaryngology
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
article

Reply to “Inferior Turbinate Outfracture Alone Has Not Been Studied in Randomized Controlled Trials”

Nolan Jones, Sungjin A. Song, Macario Camacho
article en

Abstract

We thank Dr Man and Dr Schmale for their critical appraisal of our meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing inferior turbinoplasty techniques.1 Our meta-analysis sought to establish that turbinate reduction techniques that included either removal of tissue or outfracture provided longer-lasting relief of nasal obstruction than techniques which did not utilize these measures. As mentioned in our article, the data is very limited regarding long-term outcomes of inferior turbinate reduction techniques, especially regarding randomized controlled trials. The authors mention a concern with our conclusions, namely that inferior turbinate outfracture alone provided equal outcomes as microdebrider-assisted turbinate reduction or submucosal resection of inferior turbinate. In careful review of this concern, we can understand how Dr Man and Dr Schmale may have arrived at the conclusion that we were suggesting outfracture alone provides as long-lasting relief of nasal obstruction as tissue removal techniques; however, this was not our intent. Our intent was to demonstrate that based on the available literature, procedures involving removal of tissue or in combination with outfracture have longer-lasting results than those that do not remove tissue or outfracture. Upon careful review of our manuscript, we now understand that the wording within the results and table sections may be confusing to readers and lead them to similar conclusions, so we thank Dr Man and Dr Schmale for bringing this to our attention and providing the opportunity to provide clarity. Regarding the long-term outcome data supplied by Liu et al and Chen et al, we thank the authors for their thoughtful analysis.2, 3 The concerns mentioned by the authors work to further highlight the need for more randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up in outcomes, as there is scarce literature available to support different techniques. The views expressed in this invited response are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Defense Health Agency, Department of Defense, nor the US Government. Nolan N. Jones, MD, drafted, reviewed, edited and approved final manuscript; Sungjin A. Song, MD, reviewed, edited, and approved final manuscript; Macario Camacho, MD, reviewed, edited, and approved final manuscript. None. None.

Otolaryngology
Womack Army Medical Center (US), Tripler Army Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.