Search

Purpose: The intraoperative detection of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks during endoscopic skull base surgery is critical to ensure watertight sealed defects. Intrathecal fluorescein (ITF) is a valuable adjunct to intraoperative investigation. Hence, our aim is to summarize the evidence of the efficacy of ITF as an accurate diagnostic modality and reconstruction guide for non-congenital skull base defects. Methods: Using the Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, and Embase databases, we identified studies involving the use of ITF in non-congenital CSF leaks which were published until November 2023. The STATA 18 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, in which seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. ITF was used in 1898 (90.3%) of patients, with a detection rate of 88.1%. The overall detection rate of non-congenital CSF leaks among ITF concentrations of 5% and 10% had a statistically significant pooled effect size of 2.6 (95% CI = 2.25, 2.95), while when comparing the ITF to other alternative radiological tests, it was not statistically significant with a mean difference of 0.88 (95% CI = − 0.4, 2.16). Moreover, the pooled prevalence was statistically significant in regards of the complications associated with ITF with an effect size of 0.6 (95% CI = 0.39, 0.82), indicating that 60% of patients who underwent ITF would experience at least one of the measured complications. Conclusion: ITF is considered as an efficient tool in localizing skull base defects. However, there was no significant results when comparing the ITF to other alternative radiological tests. Accordingly, if the ITF intervention is indicated, patients should be carefully selected based on their clinical need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Respiratory distress and failure is a complication of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and tracheostomy may be necessary in cases of prolonged intubation in order to reduce mechanical ventilation duration. However, according to the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery guidelines, which our institution applies, patients should not undergo tracheostomy unless cleared of the virus to reduce its spread among healthcare workers because tracheostomy is an aerosolized procedure. This study aimed to identify the outcomes of prolonged intubation in patients with and without COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy and to determine the morbidity and mortality rates in both groups. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit of King Fahad Hospital of the University, Alkhobar, Saudi Arabia, between March 1 and October 31, 2020. This study compared and analyzed the outcomes of delayed tracheostomy in patients with and without COVID-19 in terms of complication, morbidity, and mortality rates. Results: Of the 228 study participants, 111 (48.68%) had COVID-19. The mean age of the study participants was 58.67 years (SD = 17.36, max.=93, min.=20), and the majority were males (n = 149, 65.35%). Regarding tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19, 11 (9.91%) patients underwent tracheostomy; however, four (36.36%) of them had prolonged intubation. The mean intensive care unit admission length of stay for tracheostomy patients was 37.17 days, while it was 12.09 days for patients without tracheostomy (t(226)=-9.32, p < 0.001). Regarding prolonged intubation among patients with COVID-19 (n = 7, 6.31%), the complications were as follows: six people (85.71%) had dysphonia, one (14.29%) had vocal cord granuloma, and two (28.57%) had subglottic tracheal stenosis. The mortality rate among our study participants was 51.32%, and the risk was significantly higher in older people (Odds ratio = 1.04, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 1.02–1.06) and in delayed tracheostomy cases (OR = 2.95, 95% CI = 1.31–6.63). However, COVID-19 status was not significantly related to the risk of mortality. Conclusions: Delaying tracheostomy increases the risk of mortality. Therefore, we recommend weighing the risks and benefits for each patient to benefit both healthcare workers and patients with COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common inflammation of the nose and the paranasal sinuses. Intractable CRS cases are generally treated with endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Although the effect of ESS on CRS symptoms has been studied, the pattern of symptom improvement after ESS for CRS is yet to be investigated. The aim of this study was to determine the magnitude and sequence of symptom improvement after ESS for CRS, and to assess the possible preoperative factors that predict surgical outcomes in CRS patients.Methods: This was a longitudinal prospective study of 68 patients who had CRS (with or without nasal polyps). The patients underwent ESS at King Fahd Hospital of the University, Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia. The Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire was used for assessment at four time points during the study: pre-ESS, 1-week post-ESS, 4 weeks post-ESS, and 6 months post-ESS.Results: The difference between the mean scores recorded for the five SNOT-22 domains pre-ESS and 6 months post-ESS were as follows: rhinologic symptoms (t-test = 7.22, p-value =  < 0.001); extra-nasal rhinologic symptoms (t-test = 4.87, p-value =  < 0.001); ear/facial symptoms (t-test = 6.34, p-value =  < 0.001); psychological dysfunction (t-test = 1.99, p-value = 0.049); and sleep dysfunction (t-test = 5.58, p-value =  < 0.001). There was a significant difference between the mean scores recorded for the five domains pre-ESS and 6 months post-ESS. Rhinologic symptoms had the largest effect size (d = 1.12), whereas psychological dysfunction had the least effect size (d = 0.24). The only statistically significant difference in the SNOT-22 mean scores recorded 4 weeks post-ESS was observed between allergic and non-allergic patients (t = - 2.16, df = 66, p = 0.035).Conclusion: Understanding the pattern of symptom improvement following ESS for CRS will facilitate patient counselling and aid the optimization of the current treatment protocols to maximize surgical outcomes and quality of life.Level Of Evidence: Prospective observational. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]