Search

Objectives: We set out to create Consensus Guidelines, based on current evidence and relative risks of adverse effects and the costs of different treatments, which reflect the views of the British Rhinological Society (BRS) Council on where the use of biologics should be positioned within treatment pathways for CRSwNP, specifically in the setting of the National Health Service (NHS). Design: An expert panel of 16 members was assembled. A review of the literature and evidence synthesis was undertaken and circulated to the panel. We used the RAND/UCLA methodology with a multi‐step process to make recommendations on the use of biologics. Setting: N/A. Participants: N/A. Results: Recommendations were made, based on underlying disease severity, prior treatments and co‐morbidities. A group of patients for whom biologics were considered an appropriate treatment option for CRSwNP was defined. Conclusions: Although biologics are not currently available for the treatment of CRSwNP, the BRS Council have defined a group of patients who have higher rates of "failure" with current treatment pathways, higher resource use and are more likely to suffer with uncontrolled symptoms. We would urge NICE to consider approval of biologics for such indications without applying further restrictions on use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The primary aim of the study is to provide recommendations for the investigation and management of patients with new onset loss of sense of smell during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Design: After undertaking a literature review, we used the RAND/UCLA methodology with a multi‐step process to reach consensus about treatment options, onward referral, and imaging. Setting and participants: An expert panel consisting of 15 members was assembled. A literature review was undertaken prior to the study and evidence was summarised for the panellists. Main outcome measures: The panel undertook a process of ranking and classifying appropriateness of different investigations and treatment options for new onset loss of sense of smell during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Using a 9‐point Likert scale, panellists scored whether a treatment was: Not recommended, optional, or recommended. Consensus was achieved when more than 70% of responses fell into the category defined by the mean. Results: Consensus was reached on the majority of statements after 2 rounds of ranking. Disagreement meant no recommendation was made regarding one treatment, using Vitamin A drops. Alpha‐lipoic acid was not recommended, olfactory training was recommended for all patients with persistent loss of sense of smell of more than 2 weeks duration, and oral steroids, steroid rinses, and omega 3 supplements may be considered on an individual basis. Recommendations regarding the need for referral and investigation have been made. Conclusion: This study identified the appropriateness of olfactory training, different medical treatment options, referral guidelines and imaging for patients with COVID‐19‐related loss of sense of smell. The guideline may evolve as our experience of COVID‐19 develops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Conebeam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging is commonly requested by dental implant surgeons, preoperatively, for patients being considered for dental implants. Incidental maxillary sinus findings often result in otolaryngology (ENT) referral for further assessment. CBCT findings include transient and benign mucosal changes that may not require any intervention and therefore unnecessarily delay implant surgery. We aim to define appropriateness criteria for ESS in the management of adult dental implant patients with incidental maxillary sinus findings on CBCT and provide guidance to both dental implant and ENT surgeons. Design: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology was used to develop and define the appropriateness criteria. Setting: A virtual panel of 13 international experts in ESS. Participants: The expert panel completed two rounds of a modified Delphi ranking process for nine clinical scenarios, considering various factors affecting decision‐making processes. Main outcome measures: To define appropriateness criteria for ESS in adult dental implant patients who have incidental maxillary sinus findings on CBCT. Results: Patients with clinical symptoms and endoscopic findings of chronic rhinosinusitis together with an obstructed ostiomeatal complex (OMC) and concentric mucosal thickening of the ipsilateral maxillary sinus or pansinusitis were deemed appropriate candidates for ESS prior to their dental implant. ESS was not appropriate in asymptomatic patients with a patent OMC and mucosal thickening isolated to floor of the ipsilateral maxillary sinus. For uncertain scenarios, further discussion between dental implant and ENT surgeon should be considered. Conclusions: This study has developed and reported a list of appropriateness criteria to offer ESS in adult dental implant patients with incidental maxillary sinus findings on CBCT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]