Search

Objective: The anterior ethmoidal artery (AEA) is an important structure to identify during endoscopic sinus surgery. Although identification on imaging is easily taught, a consistent endoscopic landmark for the AEA, independent of anatomic ethmoid cell variation, is lacking, leaving many surgeons unclear about the exact location without dependence on navigation. Here, we describe a consistent endoscopic landmark, regardless of anatomical ethmoid variation. Methods: We prospectively enrolled adult patients undergoing endoscopic surgery involving frontal and ethmoid sinuses in this observational study. The AEA landmark was defined simply as the septation or ridge one step back along the ethmoid skull base from the posterior table of the frontal sinus. The gold standard to calculate the sensitivity of our endoscopic landmark was an image‐navigation system, registered to within 1.5 mm accuracy, locating the AEA within three planes. Both endoscopic and computerized tomography (CT) images of the pointer at the landmark were taken simultaneously. The concordance of endoscopic to navigation images was independently assessed by three blinded rhinologists. Results: Forty patients were included in our study with 73 sides analyzed. Diagnoses included chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps (52.5%), with polyps (22.5%), recurrent acute sinusitis (15%), sinonasal tumors (7.5%), and odontogenic sinusitis (2.5%). The AEA was accurately identified using our endoscopic landmark in 97.3% of the cases (71/73). Of the two cases in which the AEA was not found within the landmark, the artery was located ≤1 mm posteriorly. Conclusion: We describe a consistent endoscopic landmark to identify the AEA, conserved across various clinical diagnoses and anatomic variations in sinus structure. Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:1096–1099, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We assessed how eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) changed with endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and identified factors associated with improvement.Study Design: Retrospective chart review.Setting: Academic center.Subjects and Methods: Patients undergoing ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyposis (CRSwNP, CRSsNP) or recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) completed the Eustachian Tube Dysfunction Questionnaire 7 (ETDQ-7) preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Included in analyses were demographics, comorbidities, Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22), radiographic score, endoscopy score, procedure, and medication use. Regression analysis identified factors associated with improvement, defined as ΔETDQ-7 >3.5.Results: In total, 302 patients were studied. ETD prevalence was 68% in CRSsNP, 48% in CRSwNP, and 88% in RARS. Patients with ETD had a mean baseline ETDQ-7 of 25.8 ± 8.0 and improved postoperatively at 2 weeks (19.9 ± 8.1, P < .001), 6 weeks (17.8 ± 9.3, P < .001), 3 months (16.8 ± 8.5, P < .001), and 6 months (16.4 ± 7.9, P < .001). At 6 months, ETD improved in 89% of patients with CRSsNP, 68% with CRSwNP, and 78% with RARS. On multivariate analysis, ETD improvement was associated with higher preoperative ETDQ-7 score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.22; P = .030), higher preoperative SNOT-22 score (aOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; P = .001), higher preoperative SNOT-22 ear subscore (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.02-1.65; P = .034), posterior ethmoidectomy (aOR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.22-4.92; P = .025), and postoperative corticosteroid spray use (aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.17-1.66; P = .008).Conclusion: ETD symptoms often improve following ESS. Factors associated with improvement include higher preoperative disease burden, posterior ethmoidectomy, and postoperative corticosteroid spray.Level Of Evidence: 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous research have suggested that chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients with lower symptomatic scores, demonstrated by a 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) score <20, may not achieve meaningful quality of life improvement following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). However, indications for ESS are continuing to be defined and many low SNOT-22 scoring patients still undergo elective surgery for CRS and other benign sinonasal pathologies. The outcomes for these patients have not been previously studied. Objectives: We sought to evaluate surgical indications and outcomes for those patients with limited symptoms undergoing ESS. Methods: We screened 2829 ESS procedures from 2010–2018 to identify patients with a preoperative SNOT-22 score <20. We reviewed disease characteristics, preoperative Lund–Mackay (LM) scores, and pre- and postoperative SNOT-22 scores in patients with at least 3 months' follow-up. Results: Of all surgical ESS patients screened, 114 had low preoperative SNOT-22 scores (4.0%). Indications for these surgeries included CRS (50.0%), odontogenic sinus disease (11.4%), mucocele (10.5%), recurrent acute sinusitis (7.0%), fungal ball (5.3%), and silent sinus syndrome (4.4%). Specifically, among CRS patients, 45.6% had pulmonary comorbidities and/or systemic immunodeficiencies. Moreover, 100% of CRS patients with nasal polyps and 73.1% of CRS without polyps had LM scores >5. Patients with preoperative SNOT-22 scores between 15 and 19 achieved an average 6.5 point reduction (P <.001) postoperatively, whereas those with scores between 10 and 14 had a 5.4 point reduction (P <.001), and preoperative scores <9 resulted in no significant decrease in postoperative symptom scores (P =.98). Overall, there was a 3.3 point SNOT-22 reduction among all patients at 3 months postoperatively (P <.001). Conclusion: Patients with limited sinonasal symptoms may benefit from surgical treatment despite asymptomatic clinical presentations. A case-by-case analysis of comorbidities or unique clinical features should inform surgical decision-making for patients with lower SNOT-22 scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Confirming a thorough dissection of the frontal sinus during endoscopic sinus surgery can be challenging, and some surgeons would benefit from reliable topographic landmark identification to ensure completion of this sinus dissection. We defined (1) the "horizon sign" as the curvilinear shadow of the posterior table cast superiorly upon the anterior table of the frontal sinus at the acute angle of their meeting point and (2) the "frontal bar" as a sagittal septation at the union of the anterior/posterior tables. A cadaveric study, followed by an intraoperative consecutive case series, was performed to evaluate these 2 landmarks as indicators of complete dissection. The horizon sign was extremely reliable, identified in 100% of cadaveric frontal sinuses and intraoperative frontal sinuses. The frontal bar was present in only 67% of frontal sinuses by computed tomography. In live patients, the sensitivity and specificity of the frontal bar were 62% and 95%, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Patients frequently are advised to abstain from nose blowing following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), despite a lack of evidence supporting this recommendation. This randomized study assessed whether nose blowing in the first postoperative week affects subjective and objective clinical outcomes.Methods: Forty patients undergoing ESS were randomized into an interventional arm in which patients blew their nose at least twice daily for the first 7 postoperative days, or a control arm in which patients refrained from nose blowing. All patients were allowed to blow their nose after 7 days. The frequency and degree of epistaxis was documented by daily diary and visual analog scale (VAS). At 1 and 4 weeks postoperatively, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) were collected, and endoscopies were recorded for blinded Lund-Kennedy scale scoring.Results: There were no differences between the two groups in terms of frequency and duration of bleeding events, VAS epistaxis scores, SNOT-22 scores, and NOSE scores at every postoperative timepoint. Lund-Kennedy scores also were similar at the 1-week (P = 0.0762) and 4-week (P = 0.2340) postoperative visits, but the nose-blowing group had improved nasal discharge subscores at the first (P = 0.0075) and second (P = 0.0298) postoperative visits.Conclusion: Nose blowing after ESS does not appear to measurably improve symptoms of nasal congestion or general sinonasal quality of life, nor does it seem to adversely affect the frequency or severity of postoperative epistaxis during the first postoperative week. Judicious nose blowing may be permissible immediately after uncomplicated ESS.Level Of Evidence: 1b. Laryngoscope, 128:1268-1273, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Methods Results Conclusions Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is common in people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). Rhinologic symptom prioritization and areas that influence CRS treatment choices, including pursuing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), remain understudied.Adult PwCF + CRS were enrolled at eight centers into a prospective, observational study (2019–2023). Participants were administered the 22‐SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22) survey and a modified SNOT‐22 instrument examining symptom importance. We determined importance rankings for individual symptoms and SNOT‐22 symptom importance subdomains in two sets of subgroups—those pursuing ESS versus continuing medical management (CMT), and those on elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) versus not on ETI.Among 69 participants, the highest priorities were nasal congestion (n = 48, 69.6% important), post‐nasal discharge (32, 46.4%), facial pain (29, 43.3%), waking up tired (27, 39.1%), and fatigue (26, 37.7%). Those electing surgery (n = 23) prioritized sleep and psychological dysfunction symptoms compared to those pursuing CMT (n = 49) (sleep median score = 19.0 [interquartile range: 12.0, 25.0] vs. 4.5 [0.0, 12.8]; p < 0.0001; psychological = 17.0 [7.0, 26.0] vs. 7.0 [0.0, 15.8]; p = 0.002). ETI users had comparable SNOT‐22 total symptom importance scores to non‐ETI users (p = 0.14). Non‐ETI users (n = 34) showed a trend toward prioritizing sleep symptoms compared to ETI users (n = 35) (13.0 [2.8, 22.3] vs. 6.0 [2.0, 17.0]; p = 0.055).Nasal congestion and post‐nasal discharge were top priorities reported by PwCF + CRS. Those electing surgery prioritized sleep and psychological symptoms, highlighting their importance in pre‐operative discussions. Non‐ETI users’ prioritization of sleep improvement may highlight their unique disease impact and therapeutic needs; however, additional investigation is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Postoperative epistaxis is a known possibility following endoscopic sinonasal surgery. Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to reduce intraoperative blood loss and improve the visual field. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of TXA when given at end of surgery to reduce postoperative bleeding. Methods: This randomized, double‐blinded placebo‐controlled trial was conducted from April to November 2021. Patients scheduled to undergo endoscopic sinus or nasal surgery were randomized to receive an intravenous dose of 1 g TXA or saline intraoperatively prior to extubation. A 10‐in. visual analog scale (VAS) was used to query patients regarding postoperative bleeding each day for 1 week. The medical record was examined to determine the need for additional evaluations or interventions for epistaxis. Results: Forty patients completed the study. The mean ± SD postoperative bleeding VAS for the TXA group on the day of surgery was not significantly different from the saline group (4.82 ± 2.18 in. vs. 5.03 ± 2.14 in., p = 0.8). There were no significant differences between treatment arms on any postoperative day through day 7 (0.67 ± 1.84 in. vs. 0.87 ± 0.99 in., p = 0.7), nor in the reduction in VAS compared to the respective baseline on the day of surgery. There were no significant differences in terms of additional interventions (e.g., additional evaluation in recovery, ED, or clinic, need for packing, or return to the operating room [OR]). Conclusion: Although TXA has previously demonstrated efficacy to reduce intraoperative bleeding during sinonasal surgery, when postoperative bleeding is already minimal at baseline, TXA does not appear to reduce it significantly further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No studies have investigated when endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is best performed in lung transplant patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). We sought to examine the effects of ESS timing on pulmonary health in this population. Methods: A retrospective review of all adult lung transplant patients with CF who underwent ESS at our academic medical center over a near 25‐year period was performed. Patients were split into two groups based on median time from lung transplantation to ESS. Twenty‐three patients were included (12 ESS early and 11 ESS delayed). Outcomes included changes in pulmonary function tests (PFTs) from baseline, preoperative to postoperative measurements, the number and duration of hospitalizations for pulmonary exacerbations, and the number of antibiotic courses used specifically to treat pulmonary exacerbations during the 12 months before and after ESS. Results: Baseline demographics, operative history, and pulmonary function characteristics were similar between groups. While the ESS early group saw significant improvement from preoperative percent‐predicted FEV1 (ppFEV1) at 12 months postoperatively (confidence interval [CI]: 0.729–11.452, p = 0.030), there were no significant postoperative PFT changes for the ESS delayed group. Postoperative improvement in FEV1 and ppFEV1 at 12 months was significantly higher for the ESS early group relative to the ESS delayed group (CI: 0.010–0.583, p = 0.043; CI: 1.240–16.692, p = 0.025; respectively). The ESS early group had a significant reduction in the need for total antibiotic courses compared with the ESS delayed group (ESS early median: ‐1, interquartile range [IQR]: ‐1.5 to ‐0.5 vs. ESS delayed median: 0, IQR: 0 to 0; p = 0.027). Conclusion: Earlier ESS interventions following lung transplantation may improve pulmonary function and attenuate pulmonary exacerbations in CF patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of this study is to determine whether the infiltration of 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in addition to topical application of 1:1000 epinephrine significantly improves surgical field grading scale score over topical 1:1000 epinephrine alone. Methods: A prospective, double‐blind, randomized, controlled study was performed of 40 patients undergoing bilateral endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive infiltration with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine on 1 side of the nasal cavity vs plain saline on the other side in preparation for ESS. Both groups received topical application of 1:1000 epinephrine. Surgical videos were recorded and Wormald surgical field grading scale was assigned by 2 blinded reviewers. The number of extra 1:1000 epinephrine pledgets used during the surgery, estimated blood loss, and surgical duration were also recorded. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in Wormald surgical field grading scale, number of extra pledgets used, or estimated blood loss between the nasal cavity side infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in comparison to infiltration with saline. The side infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine had a reduced operative time compared to the side infiltrated with saline (p = 0.002). There were no differences in postoperative bleeding from questionnaire completed by patient at the first postoperative visit. Conclusion: Addition of infiltration of 1% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 to topical application of epinephrine 1:1000 for preparation of ESS does not significantly improve surgical field of view compared to topical epinephrine alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of this study is to characterize changes in hemodynamics, pain, and anxiety during office‐based endoscopic sinus procedures performed under local anesthesia. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of adults undergoing in‐office endoscopic sinus procedures under local anesthesia. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification System class 1 or 2 were included. Anesthesia was administered by topical 4% lidocaine/oxymetazoline and submucosal injection of 1% lidocaine/1:200,000 epinephrine. Vital signs and pain were measured at baseline, postinjection, and 5‐minute intervals throughout the procedure. Anxiety levels were scored using the State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors significantly associated with changes in each hemodynamic metric. Results: Twenty‐five patients were studied. This cohort was 52% male, mean age of 57.8 ± 14.4 years, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) median of 2. Mean procedure duration was 25.0 ± 10.3 minutes. Mean maximal increase in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 24.6 ± 17.8 mmHg from baseline. Mean maximal heart rate increase was 22.8 ± 10.8 beats per minute (bpm) from baseline. In multivariate regression analysis, when accounting for patient age, cardiac comorbidity, CCI, and ASA, older age was significantly associated with an increase of >20 mmHg in SBP (p = 0.043). Mean pain score during procedures was 1.5 ± 1.3 with a mean maximum of 4.0 ± 2.6. STAI anxiety scores did not change significantly from preprocedure to postprocedure (32.8 ± 11.6 to 31.0 ± 12.6, p = 0.46). No medical complications occurred. Conclusion: Although patients appear to tolerate office procedures well, providers should recognize the potential for significant fluctuations in blood pressure during the procedure, especially in older patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In uncomplicated chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), a consensus regarding appropriate medical therapy (AMT) before surgical intervention has been published in the form of "appropriateness criteria" for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). We sought to determine why tertiary surgeons may deviate from the suggested criteria and evaluated whether those deviations result in change in outcomes. Methods: Patients with uncomplicated CRS were prospectively enrolled over the course of 1 year. The 22‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcomes Test (SNOT‐22), a general health outcome out of 100, and a physician form, indicating management pathway and decision making, was completed at each visit over a 6‐month follow‐up period. A descriptive analysis was used to quantify reasons for veering from the "appropriateness criteria," and repeated linear regression modeling was used to measure whether compliance impacted SNOT‐22, general health, and Lund‐Kennedy (LK) scores over the period of study. Results: One hundred fifty‐five patients were enrolled. Sixty‐eight percent followed the appropriate management pathway based on their presentation and the suggested criteria. Disparate reasons were documented for deviation in the other 32%, and, despite establishing several predictive categories, "other" was the most common reason, with various explanations well documented. SNOT‐22, general health, and LK scores were not statistically impacted by compliancy status (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The suggested "appropriateness criteria" predict a management pathway for the majority of CRS patients. However, in a tertiary sinus center, surgeons may deviate from that model with a significant minority of their patients, for multiple reasons, without causing a change in outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endoscopic Draf 2B and Draf 3 frontal sinusotomies are frequently performed for chronic refractory frontal rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between Draf 2B and Draf 3 procedures. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted comparing patients undergoing bilateral Draf 2B vs Draf 3 procedures from 2000 to 2016. Patients with neoplasia, dysplasia, mucocele, cystic fibrosis, or ciliary dyskinesia were excluded. Preoperative disease parameters included number of prior surgeries, presence of polyps, preoperative 22‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22) score, frontal Lund‐Mackay score, anterior‐posterior diameter of the frontal ostium, and Global Osteitis Scoring Scale (GOSS). Postoperative outcomes included SNOT‐22 score, neo‐ostium patency, surgical revision rates, and complications. Results: A total of 21 patients with bilateral Draf 2B and 17 patients with Draf 3 surgeries were compared. Mean follow‐up time was 15.6 months. No significant differences were seen between groups for any preoperative disease parameter. Both cohorts showed statistically significant (p = 0.0001 [Draf 2B]; p = 0.0001 [Draf 3]) and clinically meaningful (Δ = 24.1; Δ = 24.9) improvements in SNOT‐22 at last follow‐up vs preoperatively. The Draf 2B group had greater improvement in SNOT‐22 score than the Draf 3 group at 1 to 3 months (p = 0.003), but the magnitude of improvement equalized at 5 to 9 months (p = 0.66) and last follow‐up (p = 0.90). No significant differences were noted between groups regarding patency, revision rates, or complications. Conclusion: Both Draf 2B and Draf 3 procedures offer durable symptomatic improvement for patients with refractory frontal CRS. The Draf 2B is associated with earlier postoperative symptom improvement and overall shows comparable long‐term outcomes to the Draf 3 sinusotomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]