Smith, Timothy L.

Abstract Background Sinonasal neoplasms, whether benign and malignant, pose a significant challenge to clinicians and represent a model area for multidisciplinary collaboration in order to optimize patient care. The International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Sinonasal Tumors (ICSNT) aims to summarize the best available evidence and presents 48 thematic and histopathology‐based topics spanning the field. Methods In accordance with prior International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology documents, ICSNT assigned each topic as an Evidence‐Based Review with Recommendations, Evidence‐Based Review, and Literature Review based on the level of evidence. An international group of multidisciplinary author teams were assembled for the topic reviews using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses format, and completed sections underwent a thorough and iterative consensus‐building process. The final document underwent rigorous synthesis and review prior to publication. Results The ICSNT document consists of four major sections: general principles, benign neoplasms and lesions, malignant neoplasms, and quality of life and surveillance. It covers 48 conceptual and/or histopathology‐based topics relevant to sinonasal neoplasms and masses. Topics with a high level of evidence provided specific recommendations, while other areas summarized the current state of evidence. A final section highlights research opportunities and future directions, contributing to advancing knowledge and community intervention. Conclusion As an embodiment of the multidisciplinary and collaborative model of care in sinonasal neoplasms and masses, ICSNT was designed as a comprehensive, international, and multidisciplinary collaborative endeavor. Its primary objective is to summarize the existing evidence in the field of sinonasal neoplasms and masses.

AbstractBackgroundThe impact of sinonasal malignancies (SNMs) on quality of life (QOL) at presentation is poorly understood. The Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22) and University of Washington Quality of Life (UWQOL) are validated QOL instruments with distinctive subdomains. This study aims to identify factors impacting pretreatment QOL in SNM patients to personalize multidisciplinary management and counseling.MethodsPatients with previously untreated SNMs were prospectively enrolled (2015–2022) in a multicenter observational study. Baseline pretreatment QOL instruments (SNOT‐22, UWQOL) were obtained along with demographics, comorbidities, histopathology/staging, tumor involvement, and symptoms. Multivariable regression models identified factors associated with reduced baseline QOL.ResultsAmong 204 patients, presenting baseline QOL was significantly reduced. Multivariable regression showed worse total SNOT‐22 QOL in patients with skull base erosion (p = 0.02). SNOT‐rhinologic QOL was worse in women (p = 0.009), patients with epistaxis (p = 0.036), and industrial exposure (p = 0.005). SNOT extranasal QOL was worse in patients with industrial exposure (p = 0.016); worse SNOT ear/facial QOL if perineural invasion (PNI) (p = 0.027). Squamous cell carcinoma pathology (p = 0.037), palate involvement (p = 0.012), and pain (p = 0.017) were associated with worse SNOT sleep QOL scores. SNOT psychological subdomain scores were significantly worse in patients with palate lesions (p = 0.022), skull base erosion (p = 0.025), and T1 staging (p = 0.023). Low QOL was more likely in the presence of PNI on UW health (p = 0.019) and orbital erosion on UW overall (p = 0.03). UW social QOL was worse if palatal involvement (p = 0.023) or PNI (p = 0.005).ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate a negative impact on baseline QOL in patients with SNMs and suggest sex‐specific and symptom‐related lower QOL scores, with minimal histopathology association. Anatomical tumor involvement may be more reflective of QOL than T‐staging, as orbital and skull base erosion, PNI, and palate lesions are significantly associated with reduced baseline QOL.

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate recurrence patterns and survival after recurrence among patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM).MethodsThis was a multi‐institutional retrospective review from seven U.S. institutions of patients with SNMM from 1991 to 2022. Recurrence was categorized as local, regional, distant, or multifocal. Kaplan‐Meier tests were used to evaluate disease‐free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and post‐recurrence survival (PRS) reported with standard errors (SE) and log‐rank testing used for comparison. Cox‐regression was further used, with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported.ResultsAmong 196 patients with SNMM, there were 146 patients with recurrence (74.5%). Among all patients, 60‐month DFS (SE) was 15.5% (2.9%), 60‐month OS (SE) was 44.7% (3.7%), mean age ± standard deviation at diagnosis was 69.7 ± 12.5 years, and 54.6% were female. In 26 patients who underwent primary treatment of the neck, 60‐month DFS did not differ from no treatment (p > 0.05). Isolated distant recurrence was most common (42.8%), followed by local (28.3%), multifocal (20.7%), and regional recurrence (8.3%). Among patients with regional recurrence in the neck, there was no 60‐month PRS benefit for patients undergoing salvage neck dissection or radiation (p > 0.05). Among patients with distant recurrence, only immunotherapy was associated with improved 12‐month PRS (HR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.11–0.92, p = 0.034), and no treatment group was associated with improved 24‐ or 60‐month PRS (p > 0.05).ConclusionSNMM is associated with a high recurrence rate and poor survival. Primary treatment of the neck was not associated with reduced recurrence, and immunotherapy for treatment of distant recurrence was associated with increased 12‐month PRS.

AbstractBackgroundQuality of life (QOL) for individuals with sinonasal malignancy (SNM) is significantly under‐studied, yet it is critical for counseling and may impact treatment. In this study we evaluated how patient, treatment, and disease factors impact sinonasal‐specific and generalized QOL using validated metrics in a large cohort over a 5‐year posttreatment time frame.MethodsPatients with SNM who underwent definitive treatment with curative intent were enrolled in a prospective, multisite, longitudinal observational study. QOL was assessed using the 22‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22) and University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UWQOL) instruments at pretreatment baseline and multiple follow‐ups through 5 years posttreatment. Multivariable modeling was used to determine demographic, disease, and treatment factors associated with disease‐specific and generalized physical and social/emotional function QOL.ResultsOne hundred ninety‐four patients with SNM were analyzed. All QOL indices were impaired at pretreatment baseline and improved after treatment. SNOT‐22 scores improved 3 months and UWQOL scores improved 6 to 9 months posttreatment. Patients who underwent open compared with endoscopic tumor resection had worse generalized QOL (p < 0.001), adjusted for factors including T stage. Pterygopalatine fossa (PPF) involvement was associated with worse QOL (SNOT‐22, p < 0.001; UWQOL Physical dimension, p = 0.02). Adjuvant radiation was associated with worse disease‐specific QOL (p = 0.03). Neck dissection was associated with worse generalized physical function QOL (p = 0.01). Positive margins were associated with worse generalized social/emotional function QOL (p = 0.01).ConclusionDisease‐specific and generalized QOL is impaired at baseline in patients with SNM and improves after treatment. Endoscopic resection is associated with better QOL. PPF involvement, adjuvant radiation, neck dissection, and positive margins were associated with worse QOL posttreatment.

Abstract Background The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O). Methods Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence‐based review, or evidence‐based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus. Results The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies. Conclusion This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

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.

BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is garnering increasing attention. Defining frameworks and metrics to assess the quality of key components in CRS management could assist in reducing unwarranted practice variation and increase high‐quality care.MethodsA panel of the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) QI committee reviewed the literature to determine important presurgical components of CRS care that warrant QI. The evidence was organized into 4 categories: (1) diagnosis, (2) medical management, (3) appropriate patient selection for surgery, and (4) patient‐centered discussion. The combination of these categories was used to develop a framework termed the CRS Appropriate Presurgical Algorithm (CAPA).ResultsPrior to offering surgery for CRS, the best available evidence support the following quality metrics: (1) a guideline‐based diagnosis should be confirmed; (2) appropriate medical management, including a minimum of topical corticosteroid therapy and saline irrigations, should have been attempted (assuming patient tolerance); (3) a computed tomography (CT) scan should be obtained (to confirm the presence of sinus inflammation and for surgical planning); and (4) a patient‐centered discussion regarding treatment options for refractory CRS (ie, alternative medical therapies vs surgery vs observation) while focusing on risks and benefits, the need for long‐term medical compliance, and understanding of patient preferences and expectations.ConclusionDefining metrics that assess key components to CRS care prior to offering surgery has the potential to further improve upon an already successful treatment paradigm, reduce unwarranted practice variation, and to ensure that patients are receiving a similar level of high‐quality care.

BackgroundCommonly used computed tomography (CT) staging systems for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) focus on the sinuses and do not quantify disease in the olfactory cleft. The goal of the current study was to determine whether precise measurements of olfactory cleft opacification better correlate with olfaction in patients with CRS.MethodsOlfaction was assessed using the 40‐item Smell Identification Test (SIT‐40) before and after sinus surgery in adult patients. Olfactory cleft opacification was quantified precisely using three‐dimensional (3D), computerized volumetric analysis, as well as via semiquantitative Likert scale estimations at predetermined anatomic sites. Sinus opacification was also quantified using the Lund‐Mackay staging system.ResultsThe overall cohort (n = 199) included 89 (44.7%) patients with CRS with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) and 110 (55.3%) with CRS without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP). The olfactory cleft opacified volume correlated with objective olfaction as determined by the SIT‐40 (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient [Rs] = −0.461; p < 0.001). The correlation was significantly stronger in the CRSwNP subgroup (Rs = −0.573; p < 0.001), whereas no appreciable correlation was found in the CRSsNP group (Rs = −0.141; p = 0.141). Correlations between sinus‐specific Lund‐Mackay CT scoring and SIT‐40 scores were weaker in the CRSwNP (Rs = −0.377; p < 0.001) subgroup but stronger in the CRSsNP (Rs = −0.225; p = 0.018) group when compared to olfactory cleft correlations. Greater intraclass correlations (ICCs) were found between quantitative volumetric measures of olfactory cleft opacification (ICC = 0.844; p < 0.001) as compared with semiquantitative Likert grading (ICC = 0.627; p < 0.001).ConclusionQuantitative measures of olfactory cleft opacification correlate with objective olfaction, with the strongest correlations seen in patients with nasal polyps.

Background Oral steroids are commonly used in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with and without nasal polyps (CRSwNP and CRSsNP, respectively). Past reports have included evaluation of the evidence for the use of oral steroids in CRS subtypes. However, a review with evidence‐based recommendations for all CRS subtypes has never been performed. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive, evidence‐based approach for the utilization of oral steroids in the management of CRS. A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Results This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Conclusion Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC.