Search

Purpose: To describe the self-reported practices on the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) by ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialists in Spain to identify potential areas for management optimization. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey with 16 questions was carried out. Recruitment was performed by emailing registered ENT specialists in the Spanish Society of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery (SEORL-CCC). Results: In total, 127 ENT specialists completed the survey. Fifty-one percent of respondents combined clinical criteria and objective evidence of mucosal inflammation to diagnose CRSwNP. Patient interview and, to a lower degree, a visual analogue scale were the most employed diagnostic tools to quantify symptom severity. Less than half (45%) routinely used the 22-item sino-nasal outcomes test (SNOT-22) to assess the impact of CRSwNP disease in quality of life. The use of patient-reported outcomes and other clinical evaluation tools showed a larger uptake among ENT specialists that worked at an ENT department with an available rhinology unit. Almost all the specialists surveyed (95%) recommended biological treatment, particularly in patients with uncontrolled CRSwNP with respiratory comorbidities (76%), as well as in candidates for revision surgery (66%). Conclusion: Spanish otorhinolaryngologists showed a trend toward incorporating CRSwNP guideline recommendations in their clinical practice. The observed low uptake of patient-reported outcomes and objective clinical evaluation tools in routine clinical practise have been identified as areas for optimizing the management of patients with CRSwNP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the consistency between the international guidelines recommendations and worldwide standard practices regarding diagnostic work-up and follow-up strategies for managing patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) in the era of monoclonal antibodies. Methods: A questionnaire developed by the Rhinology section of the Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Oto-rhino-laryngological Societies (Yo-IFOS) included items regarding the management of CRSwNP patients, monoclonal prescription, surgical and follow-up procedures, awareness of biologicals availability, and other relevant clinical practices. The online survey was directed to otolaryngologists and distributed in Europe, North America, South America, and the Middle East through otolaryngological and/or rhinological societies. Results: A total of 202 responses were analyzed; the mean participants' age was 45 ± 11 (73% men and 27% women), and 31% were from the United States, Canada 19%, Europe 45%, Middle East and South America 5%. Only 60% of the respondents declared using validated symptoms and endoscopic score systems in their clinical practice. Several practice discrepancies emerged in our cohort, including preferred surgical approach, prescription of preoperative oral steroids, and perioperative antibiotics (59% and 58%, respectively), as well as divergent awareness levels of available biologics for CRSwNP worldwide. Conclusions: CRSwNP needs a complex and time-consuming assessment, according to the latest guidelines. There seems to be a gap between these recommendations and the real-world data, which should draw more attention to bringing them into uniform clinical practice in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/hypothesis: To present a modified endoscopic medial maxillectomy (MEMM) approach to control maxillary sinus pathologies. Methods: MEMM was completed in 13 fresh-frozen specimens. An MEMM includes cutting the nasolacrimal duct, inferior meatus flap, and repositioning the inferior turbinate (IT). The following measurements were obtained: length of IT, height from the nasal floor to valve of Hasner, height of the IT at the level of valve of Hasner, height of the IT at the insertion of the middle turbinate, and distance from the piriform aperture to the posterior wall of maxillary sinus and to the posterior border of palatine bone. Similar measurements were also performed on craniofacial computed tomography (CT) scans (n = 50). The surgical technique was performed in a case series (n = 8). Results: The mean of the specimens was 82 (range 70–95) years old. The average area of the harvested inferior meatus flap area was 9.6 ± 1.0 cm2. In the radiologic study, the mean maximum antrostomy area was 8.8 ± 1.7 cm2 and the IT area overlapping the antral window was 5.8 ± 1.1 cm2, the area allowing a double window control was 3.1 ± 1.9 cm2, the posterior IT insertion length was 0.7 ± 0.4 cm, and the inferior meatus flap covering the inferior meatotomy had an area measuring 6.7 ± 1.7 cm2. Eight patients underwent MEMM for various benign conditions showing no recurrence after 26 month follow-up. Conclusion: The proposed modifications of MEMM provide a "double" window maxillary sinus control with access to all maxillary walls and preservation of the IT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice.Data sources: Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice.Review methods: Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice.Results: Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice.Conclusions: Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]