AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-8816/157
Otolaryngology department, College of Medicine, Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq
*Corresponding Author: Mohammed Radef Dawood, Otolaryngology department, College of Medicine, Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq.
Citation: Mohammed R. Dawood (2025), Endoscopic Septoplasty Versus to Conventional Septoplasty, J Clinical Research Notes, 6(1); DOI:10.31579/2690-8816/157
Copyright: © 2025, Mohammed Radef Dawood. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 02 February 2025 | Accepted: 11 February 2025 | Published: 19 February 2025
Keywords: nasal obstruction; nasal septal deviation; endoscopic septoplasty; conventional septoplasty
Septoplasty is a standard surgical procedure to correct nasal septum deviation, there were two major techniques performed conventional and endoscopic procedures, aim was to investigate patient`s nasal symptoms, surgical outcome, post-operative complications, and nasal endoscopic findings, in endoscopic septoplasty in comparison to conventional septoplasty. A comparative interventional study, where 60 eligible adult’s patients for septoplasty lead to nasal obstruction, were divided into 2 groups; Group (A) where endoscopic septoplasty was performed, and Group (B) were conventional technique. The patient`s nasal symptoms by subjective Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale, and Visual Analogue Score, and nasal endoscopic examination, were analyzed before septoplasty, and compared between them. So, statistically significant difference in endoscopic septoplasty procedure as, the better clinical results of patient’s symptomology, minimum intra-operative blood loss, shorter operative time, and no post-operative synechiae, as well as, faster healing process, and lesser post-operative complications, when compared to conventional septoplasty technique.
Nasal obstruction is main frequent complaint in day Ear, Nose, and Throat field (ENT), the majority of them were due to nasal septum deviation, it in addition to, causes some difficulty in breathing, but leads to improper aeration of sinus, that’s results to sinusitis, so, different surgical techniques had been presented for rectification of nasal septum deviation, first of all was nasal septal submucous resection, which considered a radical technique, and its linked with many morbidities, then septoplasty procedure was evolute, as it had less resection of nasal septum , and fewer complications [1]. With the commencement of endoscope into ENT field, there were attempt to perform it, into surgical rectification of nasal septum deviation planning to, elimination just the deviated part, spur and maxillary crest, so, is higher efficient, associated with less surgical manipulation, also it had the privilege of performing functional endoscopic sinus surgery at same sitting [2]. Several surgical techniques to correct a deviated nasal septum, is associated with a restriction and usableness to handle the whole different deformities of nasal septum, the optimal surgical rectification of septum of the nose should verify the following criteria: (a) relief of nasal obstruction. (b) conservative. (c) Non give rise to iatrogenic deformity. (d) Osteomeatal complex (OMC) exposure. (e) Ability to perform a revision surgery, whoever, the conventional approaches usually not attained the previous mentioned criteria in most cases, the excuses for that, is poor visualization, relative non-approachability, hardness in estimation of precise pathology, nasal packing requirement, removal also excessive exposure of nasal septum, and lowering field for a revision operation, while, the nasal endoscope permits exact pre-operative recognition of the pathology of nasal septum, an associated abnormalities of the lateral nasal wall, and aids for superior designing of endoscope assisted septal operation, therefore, early data’s of endoscopic septoplasty observed many usefulness factors related to this approach, as. it makes surgeons more conveniences to view the nasal tissue levels of tissue, in addition, it allows the possibility to see the surgical technique on a monitor, making it beneficial in a teaching hospital, nasal endoscopy is also, an eligible instrument in judgment primarily to detect the correlation of the nasal septum to the middle turbinate, which allows the surgeon to decide, if the deviation of the septum restrict the entrance during endoscopic sinus surgery, even in the absence of subjective nasal obstruction, therefore in this condition septoplasty may be necessary to increase the access to the middle meatus during endoscopic sinus surgery, also in a narrow nasal cavity situation, as for outpatient setting, as well as, following septoplasty during postoperative follow up [3]. The objective of this study was to compare the patient`s nasal symptoms, surgical outcome, post-operative complications, between endoscopic septoplasty technique to conventional septoplasty.
Patients and methods
This comparative interventional study, where all recruited patients' data was collected in an outpatient otorhinolaryngology setting, whom 60 adults` patients complaining of nasal obstruction due to impacted septal deviation.
Data were gathered from all recruited 60 participants, where the whole eligible patients were divided into two groups; Group (A) were 30 patients treated with conventional septoplasty procedure, and Group (B) were 30 patients treated with endoscopic septoplasty technique.
Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethic committee, and the consents were obtained from all participant patients. The protocol number of ethics committee approval was 215 at 07-01-2024.
Exclusion criteria:
Age less than 18 years, mild to moderate septal deviation, unfitness for general anesthesia, allergic or vasomotor rhinitis, acute and ⁄ or chronic rhinosinusitis (with or without polyposis), previous nasal surgery, Sino-nasal tumor, systemic medical diseases, and those whom not attended regular follow- up.
A detailed clinical precise medical concentrated ENT history was taken, and thorough ENT examination including nasal endoscopic examination and radiologic investigation as CT scan of nose and sinuses, in addition, it was used to detect the degree of septal deviation, “though, identification of osteo-meatal complex, which was used as a key point for measurement of direction and degree of septal deviation, accordingly, the severity of septal deviation, by measurement the angle between the crista Galli and the most prominent point of septal deviation, in the coronal plane, as: 1. Mild: 0°–9° degree 2. Moderate: 10°–15° degree 3. Severe: >15°degree”, also, the CT scanning of the nose and sinuses was used to detect any other Sino-nasal problems.
In addition, pre-operative investigations for surgical investigations were done; as complete blood count (CBC), bleeding profile, and virology screen.
In the current study, a classification of nasal septal deviation degree depends on Cottle's classification [4] into; I: degree: simple nasal septal deviation (simple), degree II: moderate nasal septal deviation (obstructed), degree III: severe nasal septal deviation in contact with the lateral nasal wall, Ⅳ: degree: impacted (septal deviation impacted to lateral nasal wall). So, only (impacted) nasal was involved in this study, which means that, the nasal mucosa dose not shrink by nasal decongestant drug application (no improvement in nasal obstruction symptom).
The 0-degree 2.7 mm rigid Karl Storz endoscope: nasal endoscopy performed via the following steps; First a cotton-wool soaked with nasal decongestant inserted, then kept for 10 minutes, followed by local anesthetic gel cotton-wool, and removed after 5 minutes to allows anesthetize both turbinate, and septum to minimize the pain during procedure. The nasal endoscopy was performed on regular basis, pre-operatively and at 3 months follow-up after each surgical procedure.
Septoplasty surgical techniques: “Both procedures were done under general anesthesia, by the same the surgical team”
Endoscopic septoplasty:
The nasal septum was infiltrated with 1% xylocaine in 1: 200,000 adrenalines on the convex side of the deviated part of nasal septum using Karl-Storz 0°-4 mm rigid nasal endoscope, then a hemitransfixation incision was performed, followed with continuous sub-mucoperichondrial flap elevation, the septal cartilage was incised just behind the mucosal incision. Also, contralateral mucoperichondrial flap elevation was done, so, flap elevation was continued on both nasal septum sides, and then, the most deviated nasal septal part was excised, and any exposing the maxillary crest or vomer deviation was resected too, just keeping caudal and dorsal struts were left in situ, to preserve the nasal dorsum and columella support.
At the end of this procedure, the flaps were sutured with 3-0 vicryl sutures, and packing the nasal cavities with Merocel packs “hydroxylated polyvinyl acetate” (Medtronic, Minnesota, USA).
Conventional septoplasty
This technique involves visualization through headlight illumination and nasal speculum. After nasal decongested/anesthetic infiltration, the procedure starts with Killian incision, followed by mucoperichondrial flap elevation, and tunnels creation, then removal of the most deviated septal cartilage or bone, lastly suturing with same nasal packing (Merocel packs) “hydroxylated polyvinyl acetate”.
All patients were hospitalized for 1 week, and kept on oral antibiotic as: (Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 1 g) two times daily, for 7 days if allergy to penicillin, they were given Azithromycin 500 mg capsule once daily for 3 days, also, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications as: (Diclofenac 50 mg) three times daily. The removal of nasal packs was done on 2nd post-operative day.
Assessment was made subjectively depending on patients’ response, since the objective tools for the assessment such as; rhinomanometry, but unfortunately it was not available in the current study center.
Evaluation of clinical parameters for comparison between the two procedures, via regular nasal endoscopic examination for septal condition, bleeding during and post-operative, post-operative crustation and synechiae, and healing process rapidity, in addition to, the patient`s nasal symptoms as; nasal obstruction, headache, nasal discharge, post-nasal drip, sneezing, epistaxis, smell dysfunction, and snoring, were analysis through Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale subjectively.
VAS in which the patient rate nasal symptoms from a score of (0–10); score (0) as, asymptomatic and (10), as most severe symptom.
NOSE score [5] ; it`s subjective and clinical validated tool, it has been translated into many languages, patients were provided this questionnaire in their native language, first ask them to fill out the questionnaire 2-3 days before surgery, then, were asked them to fill in the sheet, and tick the severity of each nasal symptom, it consisting of 5 elements: nasal obstruction (0–4), nasal breathing troubledness (0–4), difficult sleeping (0–4), not-possible to have adequate air in exertion (0–4). The final score levels were graded as 0 (no problem), 1 (very mild), 2 (moderate), 3(fairly bad), and 4 (very severe). The score was rated valuable if it`s more than 20, so, NOSE score, multiply patient`s total score x 5. Nasal obstruction severity classification: 5-25(mild), 30-50(moderate), 55-75(severe), 80-100 (extreme) [4]. NOSE score system (it`s subjective and clinical validated tool), used to evaluate the severity of nasal symptoms.
The analysis and storage of the collected clinical, and demographic information was performed in an Excel database, using SPSS-29 (IBM Statistical Packages for version 29 social sciences, Chicago, IL, USA). Data were reported in measures of, percentage, standard deviation, mean levels, frequency, and values (minimum-maximum), a special corrected version of the chi 2 test was used.
Statistical significance was considered to be significant, if the P value was less or equal to 0.05.
In the current study, the male to female ratio was 2.4:1, with 37 males (61.7%) and 23 females (38.3%). Age ranges from 18 – 60 years, with mean age was 31.741 ± 1.32 SD year. Table 1 elicited the age and gender distribution among the studied groups, with no significant statistically difference as the P value was 0.537.
| Age | Group A | Group B | Total |
| 18-29 | 6 Males= 4, females= 2 | 6 Males= 4, females= 2 | 12 Males=8, females=4 |
| 30-39 | 12 Males= 7, females= 5 | 14 Males= 9, females= 5 | 26 Males=16, females=10
|
| 40-49 | 6 Males= 3, females= 3 | 8 Males= 5, females= 3 | 14 Males=8, females=6 |
| 50-60 | 3 Males= 2, females= 1
| 5 Males= 3, females= 2 | 8 Males=5, females=3 |
| No significant statistically difference as the P value was 0.537 | |||
Table 1: Age and gender distribution among studied sample VAS and NOSE assessment:
Clinical profile (symptomology)
The whole 60 adults’ patients (100%) had presented with nasal obstruction in both groups. These patient`s nasal symptoms were illustrated in table 2.
| Symptomatology | Group A | % | Group B | % |
| Nasal obstruction | 30 | 100 | 30 | 100 |
| Headache | 17 | 53.125 | 15 | 46.875 |
| Nasal discharge | 11 | 45.83 | 13 | 54.16 |
| Postnasal drip | 11 | 52.38 | 10 | 47.62 |
| Sneezing | 5 | 41.66 | 7 | 58.34 |
| Nasal bleeding | 1 | 33.33 | 2 | 66.67 |
| Reduced smell sense | 1 | 50 | 1 | 50 |
Table 2: Symptomatology distribution among studied groups
It reported better clinical results in relief from nasal symptoms in group (B), than those detected in group (A),with a significant statistically difference, as shown in table 3.
| Nasal symptom obstruction scale | Group A
| Group B |
| Mean ±SD | Mean ± SD | |
| Pre-operative | 9.8±2.34 | 10.3±1.3 |
| Post-operative | 4.1±5.6 | 3.7±4.2 |
| P- value | 0.012* | 0.001* |
| *Significant results | ||
Table 3: Nasal obstruction symptom scale (NOSE) in both groups
In endoscopic septoplasty group (B) had lesser intra-operative blood loss, and shorter operative time, compared to those in conventional septoplasty group (A), with a significant statistically difference, as the P values=0.0012, and 0,0011 respectively, as seen in table 4.
| Clinical parameters | Group A | Group B | P value |
| Blood loss (ml) | 33.76± 1.245 SD | 18.82± 4.367 SD | 0.0012* |
| Operative time (minutes) | 41.621±2.657 | 19.483±3.216 SD | 0,0011* |
| *Significant results | |||
Table 4: Amount of blood loss and operative time in both groups
Nasal septum deviation was found in whole 60 patients (100%).; being right sided were detected in 31 patients (51.6%), as 14 patients (45.2%) were seen in group (A), and 17 patients (54.8%%) in group (B). while, left sided were seen in 29 patients (48.4%), being 13 patients (44.8%) in group (A), and 16 patients (55.2%) in group (B), this non-statically significant difference, as, the P value=0.683.
Posterior septal deviation (35%) was not possible to be both seen by anterior rhinoscopy with nasal speculum, and when treated surgically by conventional septoplasty technique, so it corrected by endoscopic technique, while, the endoscopic approach had also some limitations, such as, lack of binocular vision, inability to performed it bi-manually.
Other associated sino-nasal pathologies
Hypertrophied inferior turbinate was detected in 42 patients, being 23 patients in group (A), and 19 patients in group (B), and concha bullosa was seen in 24 patients, being 11 in group (A), and 13 patients in group (B).
Regarding the comparison before and after the operations between the two groups; the observation of the patient`s nasal symptoms were in the endoscopic septoplasty group (B), revealed a significant improvement inpatient`s nasal symptoms post-operatively; as nasal obstruction, headache, nasal discharge, post-nasal drip sneezing, and decrease in smell sense; than those who underwent conventional septoplasty group (A), with P value= 0.001. Please see table 5
| Symptomology | Group (B) | Group (A) | ||||
| Main symptom | Complete relief | No change | Worse | Complete relief | No change | Worse |
Nasal obstruction Headache Nasal discharge Post nasal drip Sneezing Hyposmia | (91%) | (9%) | (0%) | (72%%) | (28%) | (0%) |
| (100%) | (0%) | (0%) | (89%) | (11%) | (0%) | |
| (86%) | (14%) | (0%) | (67%) | (33%) | (0%) | |
| (85%) | (15%) | (0%) | (68%) | (32%) | (0%) | |
| (75%) | (25%) | (0%) | (56%) | (44%) | (0%) | |
| (72%) | (28%) | (0%) | (48%) | (52%) | (0%) | |
| significant result as the P value was 0.001 | ||||||
Table 5: Pre- and post-operatively in both groups
Significant differences were found between the two studied groups, as, crustation seen in (1 patient) was detected lower with endoscopic septoplasty approach group, than those (5 patients) in conventional septoplasty approach group, at first week of follow up, with P value= 0.0012, and,faster healing process time was detected in endoscopic septoplasty approach group, when those compared to conventional septoplasty approach group (4.67±1.35 SD days versus 8.52 ± 3.67 SD days), with P value= 0.0023, and, also, no post-operative synechiae were found in endoscopy septoplasty group..
While, in whom those who underwent conventional septoplasty technique, there were 2 patients, who had been developed post-operative synechiae, at 3 months follow-up period.
Most common complications seen were; unilateral mucosal flap tear (25%), followed with septal perforation (19%), recurrence/residual of deviation (17%), then post-operative bleeding (13%), in those patients whom underwent conventional septoplasty, while, in endoscopic septoplasty group, they were (1%) for mucosal tear, none for septal perforation, recurrence/residual of deviation and post-operative epistaxis, with P values = 0.0023, 0.0001, 0.0002, and 0.0012, respectively.
The initial notion of septoplasty was disseminated by Killian (1904) and Freer (1902), for more than 100 years, then in 1947, Cottle clarify surgical septoplasty procedure as managing for rectify obstructing nasal airway, and systematized the technique, while, the introduction of endoscopic techniques to correct the deformities of the nasal septum were earliest demonstrated in 1991 by Stammberger, then, from that date, the endoscopic septoplasty had been used, in addition to treat symptomatic nasal obstruction, but also to enhance surgical ingress to the nasal middle meatus, as in functional sinus surgery [6].
In the current study; there were male predominance, and male to female ratio was 2.4:1, with mean age was 31.741 ±1.32 SD year, almost the same findings were seen in other studies, as, in Nassrallah S et al study [7], whom reported that, nasal septum deviation is main structural reason for obstructing the nose, and it could be detected at every age mainly in 3th year decay, also, in Kour et al study [8], where they reported the male-to-female ratio was 3:1, and the most common age group involved belonged to the second and third decade of life in both sexes, also in Khadgi S et al, study [9], concluded that, out of 70 patients, 57(81.43%) were males and 13(18.57%) females, and, the age group mostly affected was in the third and fourth decades with total 47 patients (67.14%), again in, Suraneni VR et al, study [10], they concluded that, in the conventional septoplasty group, 26 (52%) were males and 24 (48%) were females. In the endoscopic septoplasty group, 21 (42%) were males and 29 (58%) were females.
Also, in the current study, the whole 60 adults’ patients (100%) had presented with nasal obstruction in both groups, as the main chief complaint, also, reported better clinical results in relief from nasal symptoms in group (B), than those detected in group (A), these findings were in same lines with other studies, as, in Suraneni et al study [10], reported that, in all the 100 patients presented with nasal obstruction, the next common symptom was headache present in 50 patients, out of which 22 (44%) belonged to conventional septoplasty group and 28 (56%) belonged to endoscopic septoplasty group, this was followed by post nasal discharge, so, post-
operatively, the relief of nasal obstruction was 92% in conventional septoplasty, and, 96% in endoscopic technique, in headache it was 86.37% in conventional septoplasty, and, 96.42% in endoscopic septoplasty, while regarding post nasal drip in conventional group, the relief was 66.67%, and in endoscopic group it was 100%. Also, in Singh et al [11] study concluded, that, there were less pain and morbidities in the post-operative period in the endoscopic group as compared to conventional group.
In this study, right sided septal deviation observed to be a little bit more than left sided, in all study participants, as well as, in the endoscopic septoplasty group, although this non-statically significant difference, the same observation was seen by a study done by Tukaram KV, et al [12].
The nasal endoscopic assessment permits estimation of the nasal septum morphologically, and the inferior nasal turbinate. In current study, detect the hypertrophied inferior turbinate was (70%), and concha bullosa was (40%), these findings were agreed by study done by Nassrallah S, et al [7] whom reported the presence of hypertrophy of the inferior nasal turbinate (83.33%) and the hyper-pneumatization of the middle nasal turbinate was (51.67%).
Most common complication found in the current study was mucosal tear more in patients underwent conventional septoplasty. Similarly, Kour B, et al [8], Suraneni VR, et al [10], Singh A, et al [11], and Rambabu P, et al [13] studies, they found that these complications were seen more in conventional septoplasty as compared to endoscopic septoplasty.
Also, in the current study posterior septal deviation was not possible to be both seen by anterior rhinoscopy with nasal speculum, and when treated surgically by conventional septoplasty technique, so it corrected by endoscopic technique, this detection was similar finding to following studies [13-16].
Endoscopy produces fewer postoperative complications; as less mucosal damage and perfect positioning of the Silastic ® sheet may decrease the rate of synechiae in endoscopic septoplasty technique, with better visualization during flap dissection and the separation may reduce the rate of these complications [16-18].
In the study done by Mandal S, et al [19] concluded that, the endoscopic approach showed greater inclusive clinical profile with lesser complication, and finer enlightenment, ameliorate approachability to distant places was reported, as well as, lesser blood loss and shorter operative time, than that of conventional method. Also, Bhandary R, and Shetty R, [20] concluded that, endoscopic septoplasty allows perfect and conservative reconstruct of obstructive deviated nasal septum, with lesser complications and better functional results compared to conventional technique.
Study performed by Haque et al. [21] reported that, the reparatory ability of endoscopic septoplasty varies according to different sorts of deviated nasal septum, assessed subjectively and objectively, therefore, good patient counseling and pre-operative evaluation is fundamental for utmost post-operative outcome and conformity.
Alsehli A et al [22] in their research, found that; in comparing endoscopic and traditional septoplasty in terms of operating time, functional efficacy, and perioperative morbidity, via using the PubMed database, Google, and Google Scholar, a systematic assessment of the scientific literature was conducted; a randomized prospective trial was done, where endoscopic septoplasty technique was associated with less mucosal damage (p < 0>
Yet, a study done by Na’ara S, et al [23], concluded that, endoscopic septoplasty and traditional trans-nasal trans-speculum septoplasty shows similar results in treatment of deviated nasal septum.
Limitations of the current study
A slight male predominance, main age in 3rd decade of life, although, both techniques were used in the surgical practice for correction of nasal septum deviation, but the current study analysis shows a statistically siqnificant results; goes in favor to endoscopic approach, since, it associated with best overall clinical results in patient`s symptomology, minimum blood loss and short operative time, and less post-operative complications, also, gain access to posterior septal deviation, and middle meatus which it could be combined with functional sinus surgery.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
My article, titled 'No Way Out of the Smartphone Epidemic Without Considering the Insights of Brain Research,' has been republished in the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The review process was seamless and professional, with the editors being both friendly and supportive. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.
To Dear Erin Aust – Editorial Coordinator of Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice! I declare that I am absolutely satisfied with your work carried out with great competence in following the manuscript during the various stages from its receipt, during the revision process to the final acceptance for publication. Thank Prof. Elvira Farina
