Citations 22
International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021
Orlandi, Richard R. , Kingdom, Todd T. , Smith, Timothy L. , Bleier, Benjamin S. , DeConde, Adam S., Luong, Amber , Poetker, David M., Welch, Kevin C. , Wise, Sarah K. , Adappa, Nithin D. , Anselmo‐Lima, Wilma Terezinha , Bachert, Claus , Baroody, Fuad M. , Batra, Pete S., Bernal‐Sprekelsen, Manuel , Bhattacharyya, Neil , Chang, Eugene H., Chowdhury, Naweed I. , Citardi, Martin J. , Cohen, Noah , Conley, David B. , DelGaudio, John M. , Desrosiers, Martin , Douglas, Richard , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Gray, Stacey T. , Gudis, David A. , Hamilos, Daniel L. , Han, Joseph K., Harvey, Richard J. , Hellings, Peter W. , Hopkins, Claire , Hwang, Peter H. , Javer, Amin R. , Kennedy, David W. , Kern, Robert C. , Lee, Heung‐Man , Lee, Jivianne T. , Levy, Joshua M. , Lin, Sandra Y. , Lund, Valerie, McMains, Kevin C. , Metson, Ralph, Naclerio, Robert M. , Oakley, Gretchen M. , Otori, Nobuyoshi , Parikh, Sanjay R., Patel, Zara M. , Peters, Anju T. , Philpott, Carl , Roh, Hwan‐Jung , Rudmik, Luke , Sacks, Raymond , Schlosser, Rodney J. , Sedaghat, Ahmad R. , Senior, Brent A. , Sindwani, Raj , Smith, Kristine A. , Stewart, Michael G. , Suh, Jeffrey D. , Tan, Bruce K. , Drunen, Cornelis M. van , Woodworth, Bradford A. , Wormald, Peter‐John , Wright, Erin D. , Yan, Carol H. , Zhang, Luo , Zhou, Bing , Chang, Michael T. , Bleier, Benjamin , Alt, Jeremiah A , Beswick, Daniel , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Gudis, David A , Holbrook, Eric H , Hopkins, Claire , Javer, Amin R , Jiang, Rong-San , Lal, Devyani , Lee, Heung-Man , Levy, Joshua M , Patel, Zara , Philpott, Carl , Ramakrishnan, Vijay R , Smith, Kristine , Yan, Carol , Zhang, Luo , Schlosser, Rodney J , Harvey, Richard J , Hwang, Peter H , Chang, Michael T , Soler, Zachary M. , Adappa, Nithin D. , Alt, Jeremiah A. , Beswick, Daniel M. , Chandra, Rakesh Kumar , Chang, Eugene H., Chiu, Alexander G. , Cohen, Noam A., Fokkens, Wytske Johanna , Holbrook, Eric H. , Laidlaw, Tanya M. , Lal, Devyani , Lane, Andrew P , Mullol, Joaquim , Passàli, Desiderio , Psaltis, Alkis J. , Ramanathan, Murugappan , Snidvongs, Kornkiat , Turner, Justin H. , Voegels, Richard Louis , Wang, De Yun
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | November 25, 2020 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 213-739
I. Executive Summary Background The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document. Methods ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. Results ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided. Conclusion This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.
ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery
Zanation, Adam M., Gardner, Paul A. , Schwartz, Theodore H. , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Adappa, Nithin D. , Bettag, Martin, Casiano, Roy R. , Cavallo, Luigi Maria , Ebert, Charles S. , Evans, James J., Fernandez‐Miranda, Juan C. , Folbe, Adam J. , Froelich, Sébastien , Gentili, Fred, Harvey, Richard J. , Hwang, Peter H. , Jane, John A. , Kennedy, David W. , Knosp, Engelbert, Lee, John Y. K. , Lund, Valerie J. , Prevedello, Daniel M. , Schlosser, Rodney J. , Sindwani, Raj , Solares, C. Arturo , Tabaee, Abtin, Teo, Charles , Thirumala, Parthasarathy D. , Thorp, Brian D. , Vellutini, Eduardo de Arnaldo Silva , Witterick, Ian , Woodworth, Bradford A. , Wormald, Peter‐John , Mukherjee, Debraj , Wang, Eric W , Eloy, Jean Anderson , Lal, Devyani , Schlosser, Rodney J , Mukherjee, Debraj , Harvey, Richard J , Hwang, Peter H , Prevedello, Daniel M , Adappa, Nithin D. , Bleier, Benjamin S. , Cappabianca, Paolo , Carrau, Ricardo L. , El‐Sayed, Ivan H. , Kelly, Daniel F. , Lal, Devyani , Liu, James K. , Snyderman, Carl H
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology | July 22, 2019 | Volume: 9 | Issue: S3 | Pages: No page available
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.