Diagnostic Approaches and Surgical Outcomes in Nasal Valve Dysfunction: A Systematic Review

Background: Nasal valve dysfunction (NVD) is a common yet underrecognized cause of nasal airway obstruction, with a significant impact on quality of life. Despite its clinical relevance, no universally accepted diagnostic standard exists, and optimal management remains debated. Multiple diagnostic tools and surgical or minimally invasive treatments have been proposed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate current evidence regarding diagnostic approaches and treatment outcomes in NVD. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was performed for studies published between January 1990 and January 2026, in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparative studies, cohort studies, and case series (≥10 patients) assessing diagnostic methods or therapeutic interventions for NVD were included. Diagnostic data were synthesized narratively. The primary surgical outcome was change in the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, ROBINS-I, and QUADAS-2 tools. Results: Seventy-two primary clinical studies were included (15 diagnostic, 57 treatment-focused). Objective airflow measurements, particularly rhinomanometry and peak nasal inspiratory flow, showed greater reliability than isolated clinical maneuvers. Imaging modalities provided anatomical detail but correlated inconsistently with symptoms. Meta-analysis of 12 studies (n = 1210 patients) suggests that both traditional surgical and minimally invasive interventions can substantially improve nasal breathing, with mean NOSE score reductions of 40–55 points, though heterogeneity precludes direct comparison of their relative effectiveness. Conclusions: Diagnosis of NVD requires a multimodal approach combining clinical assessment, validated symptom scores, and selective objective testing. Surgical and minimally invasive treatments provide substantial symptom improvement when appropriately indicated. Evidence is constrained by the predominance of observational data, emphasizing the need for standardized diagnostics and robust comparative trials.