Search

Background: Sinonasal malignancies are a rare subset of head and neck tumors, and surveillance strategies after definitive tumor treatment are often generalized from those for overall head and neck cancer outcomes data. However, recent literature suggests that the posttreatment period in sinonasal cancer is fundamentally different and a more tailored surveillance approach may be beneficial. Although rates of symptomatology are high in head and neck cancer recurrence and patient‐driven follow‐up is common, rates of symptomatology are unknown in sinonasal cancer specifically. Methods: Patients with recurrence of sinonasal malignancy were identified at 3 academic rhinology and skull base surgery centers. Demographic, tumor, and treatment data were collected. Rates of symptomatology at presentation were tabulated and examined in the context of several other variables. Results: Fifty‐five patients had recurrence of sinonasal malignancy after definitive treatment. Fifty‐one percent of patients had no suspicious symptoms at the time of tumor recurrence, with an average time to recurrence of 33 months. Male patients and patients with stage IVA or lower disease were significantly more likely to be asymptomatic at the time of recurrence (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Patients with sinonasal malignancy have a much lower rate of symptomatology during tumor recurrence than that observed in head and neck cancer overall. Furthermore, time to recurrence is substantially longer, as a majority of head and neck cancer recurrences occur in the first 12 months after treatment. These differences highlight the need for more tailored surveillance paradigms in asymptomatic patients with a history of a definitively treated sinonasal neoplasm. [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]