Gudis, David A

AbstractArtificial intelligence (AI) is ubiquitous and expanding, and the healthcare industry has rapidly adopted AI and machine learning for numerous applications. It is essential to understand that AI is not immune to the biases that impact our clinical and academic work, and in fact may inadvertently amplify rather than reduce them. As we harness the power of AI, it is our obligation to our patients to ensure that we address these concerns. We must take responsibility for proactive stewardship to protect against bias, not only for new AI algorithms, but also for our research studies that may one day provide data for those algorithms.

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.

Abstract Background Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a multisystem disease that often requires otolaryngology care. Individuals with CF commonly have chronic rhinosinusitis but also present with hearing loss and dysphonia. Given these manifestations of CF, otolaryngologists are frequently involved in the care of patients with CF; however, there is limited consensus on optimal management of sinonasal, otologic, and laryngologic symptoms. Methods The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation convened a multidisciplinary team of otolaryngologists, pulmonologists, audiologists, pharmacists, a social worker, a nurse coordinator, a respiratory therapist, two adults with CF, and a caregiver of a child with CF to develop consensus recommendations. Workgroups developed draft recommendation statements based on a systematic literature review, and a ≥80% consensus was required for acceptance of each recommendation statement. Results The committee voted on 25 statements. Eleven statements were adopted recommending a treatment or intervention, while five statements were formulated recommending against a specific treatment or intervention. The committee recommended eight statements as an option for select patients in certain circumstances, and one statement did not reach consensus. Conclusion These multidisciplinary consensus recommendations will help providers navigate decisions related to otolaryngology consultation, medical and surgical management of CF‐CRS, hearing, and voice in individuals with CF. A collaborative and multidisciplinary approach is advocated to best care for our patients with CF. Future clinical research is needed utilizing standardized, validated outcomes with comprehensive reporting of patient outcome, effects of modulator therapies, and genetic characteristics to help continue to advance care, decrease morbidity, and improve the quality of life for individuals with CF.

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.