Donaldson, Angela

AbstractThe American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated “Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis”. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 developed recommendations address diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, the appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management (including radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function), and the judicious use of systemic and topical therapy. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, an immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. An updated guideline is needed as a result of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.

AbstractThe American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published the updated “Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis” as a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 developed recommendations address diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, the appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management (including radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function), and the judicious use of systemic and topical therapy. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. An updated guideline is needed as a result of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.MethodsThis executive summary describes the guideline developed using the 55‐page protocol published as the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual (3rd edition), which summarizes the methodology for assessments of current data, topic prioritization, development of key action statements, application of value judgements, and related procedures. The guideline update group represented the disciplines of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, infectious disease, family medicine, allergy and immunology, advanced practice nursing, and a consumer advocate.Differences from Prior GuidelineThis clinical practice guideline is as an update, and replacement, for an earlier guideline published in 2015 by the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO‐HNSF).1 An update was planned for 5 years after the initial publication date and was further necessitated by new primary studies and systematic reviews that might suggest a need for modifying clinically important recommendations.2 Changes in content and methodology from the prior guideline include the following: New evidence from 14 guidelines, 194 systematic reviews, and 133 RCTs. Emphasis on patient education and counseling with new explanatory tables. Expanded action statement profiles to explicitly state quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, intentional vagueness, and differences of opinion. Enhanced external review process to include public comment and journal peer review. New algorithm to clarify decision making, watchful waiting, action statement relationships. Extension of watchful waiting (without antibiotic therapy) as an initial management strategy to all patients with uncomplicated acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) regardless of severity, not just patients with “mild” illness (prior guideline). Clarified the recommended timeline for the diagnosis, conservative management and antibiotic treatment of ABRS. Change in recommendation to first‐line antibiotic therapy for ABRS amoxicillin, with or without clavulanate, from amoxicillin alone (prior guideline). Addition of aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) as a chronic condition that modifies management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Three new key action statements on managing CRS that focus on the use of biologics (recommend against when patients do not have polyps and educate patients about them when they do) and a recommendation against the empiric use of antibiotics for CRS solely as a third‐party requirement for surgery or imaging.

Objectives Studies suggest that transplant patients are at a higher risk of developing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, there is a dearth of studies describing the factors that may be linked to the development of CRS in this population. Our objective is to identify the risk factors associated with the development of CRS in transplant recipients. Study design Retrospective cohort. Setting Tertiary care center. Methods This cohort included 3347 transplant recipients seen between 2017 and 2022. Of these, 2128 patients met the inclusion criteria and were grouped according to whether they were diagnosed with CRS during the post-transplant period. The analysis included both univariate and multivariate analysis to ascertain the odds ratio (OR) and predictive factors. Results Of the 2128 patients, 649/2128 (30.4%) had CRS. CRS patients had an increased prevalence of previous endoscopic sinus surgery, allergic rhinitis, and recurrent acute rhinosinusitis in the pre-transplant period compared to the non-CRS group. According to the multivariate analysis, patients with primary immunodeficiency and additional transplant were 1.9 and 3.1 times more likely to develop CRS during the posttransplant period (95% CI: 1.3–2.6, p < .0001), (95% CI: 1.3 −7.3, p = .01), respectively. Sirolimus use was also associated with the development of CRS (OR = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1–1.9, p = .01). Conclusion This study is the largest cohort aimed at determining the predictive factors associated with the development of CRS. Patients with pretransplant rhinologic conditions, hematologic deficiencies, and the utilization of specific immunosuppressants were found to have a higher likelihood of developing CRS following transplantation.

Objectives Transplant patients are high risk for surgery due to their immunocompromised state. There is a paucity of evidence concerning the differences in incidence of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in solid versus non-solid organ transplant. Our aim is to analyze the difference in incidence of CRS requiring endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) between non-solid and solid transplant populations and determine if certain risk factors are associated with increased incidence of recalcitrant CRS in non-solid versus solid transplants. Study Design Retrospective cohort. Setting Multisite tertiary academic center. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of 1303 transplant recipients who were seen in our rhinologic clinic for CRS between 2017 and 2022. A total of 224 patients underwent ESS and were further analyzed for risk factors associated with recalcitrant disease requiring sinus surgery. Subgroup analysis based on solid and non-solid organ transplant was performed. Results Of the 224 patients in the study, 171/224 (76.3%) had solid transplants while 53/224 (23.6%) had non-solid transplants. 17.19% of all transplant recipients required ESS. The incidence of ESS in non-solid transplants was 28.2% versus 57% in solid transplant. The risk of recalcitrant CRS in solid transplant recipients was almost 1.78 times greater than those with non-solid organ transplant (95% CI, 1.27-2.54, p = 0.0005). Individual factors such as certain immunotherapy drugs, pancytopenia, and rejection appear to correlate with the risk of ESS in both non-solid and solid organ transplant. Conclusion Risk of ESS was greater in the solid transplant recipients compared to those who received non-solid organ transplant.

In recent years, the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for craniopharyngiomas has proven to be a safe option for extensive tumor resection, with minimal or no manipulation of the optic nerves and excellent visualization of the superior hypophyseal branches when compared to the Transcranial Approach (TCA). However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the criteria for selecting different approaches. To explore the current results of EEA and discuss its role in the management of craniopharyngiomas, we performed MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS searches from 2012 to 2022. Baseline characteristics, the extent of resection, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed through an X2 and Fisher exact test, and a comparison between quantitative variables through a Kruskal–Wallis and verified with post hoc Bonferroni. The tumor volume was similar in both groups (EEA 11.92 cm3, -TCA 13.23 cm3). The mean follow-up in months was 39.9 for EEA and 43.94 for TCA, p = 0.76). The EEA group presented a higher visual improvement rate (41.96% vs. 25% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 7.7). Permanent DI was less frequent with EEA (29.20% vs. 67.40% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 0.2). CSF Leaks occurred more frequently with EEA (9.94% vs. 0.70% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 15.8). Recurrence rates were lower in the EEA group (EEA 15.50% vs. for TCA 21.20%, p = 0.04, OR 0.7). Our results demonstrate that, in selected cases, EEA for resection of craniopharyngiomas is associated with better results regarding visual preservation and extent of tumor resection. Postoperative CSF leak rates associated with EEA have improved compared to the historical series. The decision-making process should consider each person’s characteristics; however, it is noticeable that recent data regarding EEA justify its widespread application as a first-line approach in centers of excellence for skull base surgery.