Tabaee, Abtin

AbstractObjectiveCritical components of the nasal endoscopic examination have not been definitively established for either the normal examination or for clinical disorders. This study aimed to identify concordance among rhinologists regarding the importance of examination findings for various nasal pathologies.Study DesignA consortium of 19 expert rhinologists across the United States was asked to rank the importance of findings on nasal endoscopy for 5 different sinonasal symptom presentations.SettingAn online questionnaire was distributed in July 2023.MethodsThe questionnaire utilized JotForm® software and featured 5 cases with a set of 4 identical questions per case, each covering a common indication for nasal endoscopy. Rankings were synthesized into Normalized Attention Scores (NASs) and Weighted Normalized Attention Scores (W‐NASs) to represent the perceived importance of each feature, scaled from 0 to 1.ResultsGeneral concordance was found for examination findings on nasal endoscopy within each case. The perceived features of importance differed between cases based on clinical presentation. For instance, in evaluating postnasal drip, the middle meatus was selected as the most important structure to examine (NAS, 0.73), with mucus selected as the most important abnormal finding (W‐NAS, 0.66). The primary feature of interest for mucus was whether it was purulent or not (W‐NAS, 0.67). Similar analyses were performed for features in each case.ConclusionThe implicit framework existing among rhinologists may help standardize examinations and improve diagnostic accuracy, augment the instruction of trainees, and inform the development of artificially intelligent algorithms to enhance clinical decision‐making during nasal endoscopy.

Background Endoscopic skull‐base surgery (ESBS) is employed in the management of diverse skull‐base pathologies. Paralleling the increased utilization of ESBS, the literature in this field has expanded rapidly. However, the rarity of these diseases, the inherent challenges of surgical studies, and the continued learning curve in ESBS have resulted in significant variability in the quality of the literature. To consolidate and critically appraise the available literature, experts in skull‐base surgery have produced the International Consensus Statement on Endoscopic Skull‐Base Surgery (ICAR:ESBS). Methods Using previously described methodology, topics spanning the breadth of ESBS were identified and assigned a literature review, evidence‐based review or evidence‐based review with recommendations format. Subsequently, each topic was written and then reviewed by skull‐base surgeons in both neurosurgery and otolaryngology. Following this iterative review process, the ICAR:ESBS document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results The ICAR:ESBS document addresses the role of ESBS in primary cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea, intradural tumors, benign skull‐base and orbital pathology, sinonasal malignancies, and clival lesions. Additionally, specific challenges in ESBS including endoscopic reconstruction and complication management were evaluated. Conclusion A critical review of the literature in ESBS demonstrates at least the equivalency of ESBS with alternative approaches in pathologies such as CSF rhinorrhea and pituitary adenoma as well as improved reconstructive techniques in reducing CSF leaks. Evidence‐based recommendations are limited in other pathologies and these significant knowledge gaps call upon the skull‐base community to embrace these opportunities and collaboratively address these shortcomings.

BackgroundSigns of inflammation are commonly encountered during endoscopic examination of the Eustachian tube (ET) region. The clinical applicability of these findings may be enhanced by use of a standardized assessment score.MethodsDigital video recordings were obtained of 50 nasal endoscopy examinations of the nasopharyngeal portion of the ET. Four fellowship‐trained rhinologists independently reviewed the videos with regard to specific physical findings: edema of the ET torus, erythema of the ET torus, exudate at the ET orifice, and presence of tubal tonsil. Scoring of this Endoscopic Evaluation of the Eustachian Tube (3ET) was reported using both 2‐point and 3‐point scales. Each reviewer repeated the scoring at a 10‐day interval. Interrater and intrarater agreement were calculated for each item and the total scores.ResultsInterrater and intrarater agreement were greater for the 3‐point scale than the 2‐point scale. Interrater agreement for overall instrument using the 3‐point scale was in the “acceptable” range for Krippendorff's alpha on both the first trial (0.6922) and second trial (0.7238). Intrarater agreement was generally “excellent” for individual items as well as the overall instrument.ConclusionThe 3ET comprising these 4 physical findings has acceptable interrater and intrarater reliability, and may be applied to future clinical studies of ET function and disease.