This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

SAMUEL FOMON, M.D.; VICTOR R. SYRACUSE, M.D.; NATHAN BOLOTOW, M.D.; MARKEY PULLEN, M.D.

Arch Otolaryngol. 1946;44(2):141-156.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THE PURPOSE of this paper is to challenge contemporary orthodoxy¹ which still adheres to the concept that maintenance of the profile projection of the nasal pyramid is dependent mainly on support furnished by the septum. Probably this concept has never been seriously questioned because of the saddling of the dorsum and the drooping of the tip following a too generous submucous resection. The fear of such unfortunate consequences has led surgeons to leave an "ample" ventral (anterior) and caudal (inferior) buttress in the management of septal deflections, even when these parts of the septum were in themselves major factors in the obstruction.

If "the stream of inspired air," as expressed by Proetz,² "does not pursue a straight course from nostril to choana, but passes, in the main, in a wide curve beginning at the nostril, extending through the olfactory fissure and ending in the choana," (fig. 1)—a fact which can . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
NEW YORK; PROVIDENCE, R. I.; NEW YORK

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?