Citations

AbstractBackgroundWe identify chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) manifestations associated with how rhinologists assess CRS control, with a focus on patient perspectives (patient‐reported CRS control).MethodsFifteen rhinologists were provided with real‐world data from 200 CRS patients. Participating rhinologists first classified patients’ CRS control as “controlled,” “partly controlled,” and “uncontrolled” using seven CRS manifestations reflecting European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) CRS control criteria (nasal obstruction, drainage, impaired smell, facial pain/pressure, sleep disturbance, use of systemic antibiotics/corticosteroids in past 6 months, and nasal endoscopy findings) and patient‐reported CRS control. They then classified patients’ CRS control without knowledge of patient‐reported CRS control. Interrater reliability and agreement of rhinologist‐assessed CRS control with patient‐reported CRS control and EPOS guidelines were determined.ResultsCRS control classification with and without knowledge of patient‐reported CRS control was highly consistent across rhinologists (κw = 0.758). Rhinologist‐assessed CRS control agreed with patient‐reported CRS control significantly better when rhinologists had knowledge of patient‐reported CRS control (κw = 0.736 vs. κw = 0.554, p < 0.001). Patient‐reported CRS control, nasal obstruction, drainage, and endoscopy findings were most strongly associated with rhinologists’ assessment of CRS control. Rhinologists’ CRS control assessments weakly agreed with EPOS CRS control guidelines with (κw = 0.529) and without (κw = 0.538) patient‐reported CRS control. Rhinologists classified CRS as more controlled than EPOS guidelines in almost 50% of cases.ConclusionsThis study directly demonstrates the importance of patient‐reported CRS control as a dominant influence on rhinologists’ CRS control assessment. Knowledge of patient‐reported CRS control may better align rhinologists’ CRS control assessments and treatment decisions with patients’ perspectives.

Abstract Introduction Patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and positive sinonasal bacterial cultures may be recalcitrant to topical therapy alone due to the additional local inflammatory burden associated with bacterial infection/colonization. Objective To evaluate sinonasal outcomes in CRSwNP patients with a positive perioperative bacterial culture, who were treated with postoperative intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) alone versus INCS in combination with a short-term course of oral corticosteroids (OCS). Methods This is a retrospective chart review of CRSwNP patients. A total of 59 patients met inclusion criteria, including positive perioperative bacterial culture and treatment with INCS with or without concomitant use of OCS. Two cohorts were formed based on the chosen postoperative medical treatment; 32 patients underwent postoperative INCS alone, while 27 underwent INCS plus a ≤ 2-week course of OCS. The 22-item sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) scores and Lund-Kennedy scores (LKS) were assessed preoperatively, and at 2-week, 4-week, and 4 to 6 months after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Results There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative sinonasal symptoms or endoscopic scores between the cohorts treated with INCS plus OCS versus those prescribed INCS alone (p > 0.05). Our regression model failed to demonstrate a relationship between the use of OCS and better sinonasal outcomes at 2-week, 4-week, and 4 to 6 months after ESS (p > 0.05). Conclusion Our study suggests that in a cohort of CRSwNP patients with recent bacterial infections, the postoperative use of combined OCS and INCS did not result in a statistical improvement of endoscopic and symptomatic outcomes over INCS irrigation alone. However, both treatment groups had a clinically significant improvement based on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference.

AbstractObjectivesDysfunction in smell or taste is well recognized phenomenon in patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2. This study aimed to quantify the incidence and associated co‐morbidities of reported olfactory or gustatory dysfunction in patients who tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2.MethodsFrom March 23, 2020 through July 31, 2020, 192,683 patients were tested for SARS‐CoV‐2 at Mayo Clinic. These patients with a positive test were contacted via telephone by physicians at Mayo Clinic and information gathered on patient demographics, comorbidities, symptoms and clinical risk stratification based on these factors.ResultsTwo thousand two hundred and fifty patients tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 (1.2%). Six hundred and sixty‐seven (29.6%) of these patients reported loss of smell or taste. Factors found to be correlated with reporting loss of smell or taste on multivariate analysis were: younger age, female sex, or symptoms of chest pain or tightness, cough, or headache and lower clinical risk category. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was associated with not reporting loss of taste or smell.ConclusionOf 2250 patients testing positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 at Mayo Clinic, 667 reported loss of taste and smell. Patients who reported loss of smell or taste were younger, female and more likely to report cough, chest pain, headache, or history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but overall had fewer high‐risk comorbidities. Those who were older, male, and a reported history of CAD were less likely to report chemosensory dysfunction. Our data are the largest single institution data reporting COVID‐19 associated loss of smell or taste, and the first to associate COPD and CAD as factors that affect rates of reported chemosensory dysfunction.Level of evidenceIIB.

The management of clival chordoma in our group shifted around 2013 to mostly endoscopic, and proton beam was introduced for our multidisciplinary team. Consecutive patients who had surgical resection from 1987 to 2021 were reviewed. A total of 58 patients (39 patients after 2013) were analyzed. The mean tumor size was 3.7 cm, and the most common location was the upper clivus (43%). Compared to before 2013, after 2013, the endoscopic endonasal approach was more common (90%, p < 0.001), and more gross or near total resections (64%, p = 0.002) were attained. Ten cases (17%) were revision surgeries referred from elsewhere, and three cases (5%) underwent additional surgery elsewhere before adjuvant radiation. The postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak occurred in 7%. Post-operative new cranial nerve deficits occurred in 32% before 2013, compared to 2.6% after 2013 (p = 0.004). For cases before 2013, 10 patients (53%) recurred during the median follow-up of 144 months (mean, 142 months), whereas for cases after 2013, seven patients (18%) recurred with a median follow-up of 35 months (mean, 42 months). 5-year progression-free survival was 58%, and 5-year overall survival was 87%. A specialized multidisciplinary team improved the resection rate compared to a historical cohort with an excellent morbidity profile.

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.

Objective: To evaluate geographic and temporal trends in Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) billing and reimbursements across female otolaryngologists (ORL). Methods: We performed a cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of the 2017 Medicare Physician and Other Suppliers Aggregate File. We analyzed differences in the number of services, patients, reimbursements, unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes used, and services billed per patient among female ORLs. Results: Female ORLs accounted for 15.2% of the 8453 Medicare-reimbursed ORLs. Female ORLs who graduated between 2000 and 2010 were reimbursed a median of $58 031.9 (IQR: $32 286.5-$91 512.2) and performed a median of 702 (IQR: 359.5-1221.5) services, significantly less than those who graduated between 1990 and 1999 (median: $67 508.9; IQR: 37 018.0-110 471.5; P < .001; median: 1055.5; IQR: 497.3-1944; P < .001). Female ORLs who graduated between 2000 and 2010 saw a median of 232 patients (IQR: 130.5-368), significantly less than those who graduated between 1990 and 1999 (median: 308; IQR: 168.3-496; P < .001) patients, significantly more than those. Female ORLs in urban settings performed a median of 795 (IQR: 364-1494.3) services and billed for a median of 42 (IQR: 28-58) unique codes, significantly fewer than their counterparts in rural settings (median: 1096; IQR: 600-2192.5; P = .002; median: 54; IQR: 31.5-64.5; P = .001). Conclusions: Medicare reimbursements and billing patterns across female ORLs varied by graduation decade and geography. Female ORLs further along in their careers may be reimbursed more with greater clinical volume and productivity. Those practicing in urban settings may have practices with decreased procedural diversity and lower clinical volume compared to their counterparts in rural areas.

AbstractBackgroundSinonasal adenocarcinoma (SNAC) is a rare tumor. The impact of health disparities on survival, stage at presentation, and utilization of surgery is not well understood in patients with SNAC.MethodsThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for cases of SNAC from 1973 to 2015. Cases were analyzed to assess for disparities in presentation, treatment, and survival.ResultsSNAC was identified in 630 patients. In a multivariate model of overall survival, an age increase of 10 years (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.37, p < 0.001), male sex (HR = 1.26, p = 0.045), and more recent decade of diagnosis (HR = 0.74, p < 0.001) were significantly related to time‐to‐death. There is a higher rate of SNAC‐related death in counties with more rural populations (p = 0.027).ConclusionFuture interventions targeting rural and less well‐educated populations may improve care with the goal of increasing the span of healthy life and reducing survival disparities related to SNAC.

Objective To provide a comprehensive state‐of‐the‐art review of the emerging role of urine leukotriene E4 (uLTE4) as a biomarker in the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), aspirin‐exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD), and asthma. Data Sources Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Review Methods A state‐of‐the‐art review was performed investigating the role of uLTE4 as a diagnostic biomarker, predictor of disease severity, and potential marker of selected therapeutic efficacy. Conclusions uLTE4 has been shown to be a reliable and clinically relevant biomarker for CRS, AERD, and asthma. uLTE4 is helpful in ongoing efforts to better endotype patients with CRS and to predict disease severity. Implications for Practice Aside from being a diagnostic biomarker, uLTE4 is also able to differentiate aspirin‐tolerant patients from patients with AERD and has been associated with objective disease severity in patients with CRS with nasal polyposis. uLTE4 levels have also been shown to predict response to medical therapy, particularly leukotriene‐modifying agents.