Search

Background: Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with/without nasal polyps (CRSwNP/CRSsNP) benefit from endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), with an estimated success rate of 80%. At present, the influence on clinical outcome after ESS of eosinophils, eosinophilic mucin (EM), and fungal hyphae (FH) in secretions remains unclear. By delineating CRS groups and subgroups based on the finding of eosinophils, EM, and FH, differences in recurrence after ESS were investigated., Methods: A prospective monocenter study including 221 CRS patients who were unresponsive to medical treatment and underwent ESS was performed. All tissue and sinonasal secretions were microscopically examined for the presence of eosinophils, EM, and FH. Patients were followed for 3 years after surgery. Recurrence was defined according to the European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps., Results: In total, 96 CRSwNP and 125 CRSsNP patients were included. Tissue eosinophils were found in 78% of CRSwNP patients compared with 42% in CRSsNP patients. EM was observed in 52% of the CRSwNP group versus 20% of the CRSsNP group. Furthermore, secretion analysis revealed FH in 7% of CRS. Recurrence in the total group was 22% over 3 years. CRSwNP patients with tissue eosinophilic involvement showed a recurrence rate of 48%, and those with additional EM showed recurrence in 56%., Conclusion: The presence of eosinophils in tissue or airway secretions greatly increases the risk of recurrent disease in CRSwNP patients. The finding of tissue eosinophilia and EM provides valuable information regarding the increased likelihood of CRS recurrence after ESS, whereas the finding of FH does not.

Unlabelled: Comparing the microdebrider and standard instruments in endoscopic sinus surgery: a double-blind randomised study., Objective: It is frequently stated that microdebriders provide better mucosal preservation in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), and therefore better and faster healing, when compared to the standard Blakesley instruments. However, evidence from comparative prospective studies is lacking. In this study, we compared the results of microdebriders with traditional surgical instruments for ESS., Methods: A prospective, randomised, comparative, double-blind study in 50 patients undergoing bilateral ESS. Each patient was operated on with both instruments: one side of the nose with the microdebrider only, and the other side with standard instruments. The outcome of surgery was measured by using a symptom score and an endoscopic score at five time points during the first six postoperative months., Results: Both instruments resulted in symptom improvement and in endoscopically visible healing over time, but no significant difference was found between the two techniques. In endoscopic evaluation, only the total score at 3 weeks after surgery was significantly better in the microdebrider group. No significant difference was found at any other time point. Synechia formation, patency of middle meatal antrostomy, and open access to the ethmoid were the same in both groups., Conclusion: In this study of endoscopic sinus surgery the use of the microdebrider does not offer major advantages compared to the standard instruments.