Choby, Garret

ObjectivesUrine leukotriene E4 (uLTE4) is a biomarker of leukotriene synthesis and is elevated in patients with aspirin‐exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). It can also be useful to help delineate aspirin‐tolerant chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) patients from AERD patients. The purpose of this study is to determine if uLTE4 biomarker levels are associated with objective and subjective markers of disease severity in patients with CRSwNP.MethodsA retrospective analysis of CRSwNP patients who underwent uLTE4 testing was completed to determine the association of uLTE4 levels to markers of disease severity. uLTE4 levels, as well as presenting subjective (Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 [SNOT22] scores, asthma control test [ACT] scores) and objective data (Lund‐Mackay CT score, spirometry and lab values) were collected.ResultsAmong the 157 CRSwNP patients who met inclusion criteria, uLTE4 levels were associated with history of asthma (P< .001), aspirin sensitivity (P< .001), worse Lund‐Mackay CT scores (P= .002) and other objective markers of disease severity including serum IgE (P= .05), presenting blood eosinophil level (P< .001), and the highest recorded eosinophil level (P< .001). In subgroup analysis, associations of uLTE4 to disease markers had stronger correlations in the aspirin sensitive CRSwNP group (Rrange 0.31–0.52) than the aspirin tolerant CRSwNP group (Rrange −0.30–0.24). uLTE4 levels were not associated with subjective symptom scores (SNOT22 and ACT scores).ConclusionElevated uLTE4 biomarker levels are associated with worsened objective markers of disease severity in CRSwNP patients but not patient‐reported symptom measures.Level of Evidence3Laryngoscope, 131:961–966, 2021

BackgroundAcute invasive fungal sinusitis (AIFS) is a potentially life‐threatening diagnosis in immunocompromised patients. Identifying patients who could benefit from evaluation and intervention can be challenging for referring providers and otolaryngologists alike. We aimed to develop and validate an accessible diagnostic tool to estimate the probability of AIFS.MethodsRetrospective chart review from 1999 to 2017 identified all patients evaluated for possible AIFS at a tertiary care center. AIFS was diagnosed by pathologic confirmation of fungal tissue angioinvasion. Stepwise selection and univariate logistic regression were used to screen risk factors for a multivariable predictive model. Model performance was assessed using Tukey's goodness‐of‐fit test and the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Model coefficients were internally validated using bootstrapping with 1000 iterations.ResultsA total of 283 patients (244 negative controls, 39 with AIFS) were included. Risk factors in our final diagnostic model included: fever ≥38°C (log‐odds ratio [LOR] 1.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 2.90), unilateral facial swelling, pain, or erythema (LOR 2.84; 95% CI, 1.46 to 4.23), involvement of the orbit or pterygopalatine fossa on imaging (LOR 3.02; 95% CI, 1.78 to 4.26), and mucosal necrosis seen on endoscopy (LOR 5.52; 95% CI, 3.81 to 7.24), with p < 0.01 for all factors. The model had adequate goodness of fit (p > 0.05) and discrimination (AUC = 0.96).ConclusionWe present an internally validated diagnostic tool to stratify the risk for AIFS. The estimated risk may help determine which patients can be observed with serial nasal endoscopy, which ones could be biopsied, and which ones would benefit from immediate surgical intervention.

BackgroundPost‐viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD) is one of the most common causes of olfactory loss. Despite its prevalence, optimal treatment strategies remain unclear. This article provides a comprehensive review of PVOD treatment options and provides evidence‐based recommendations for their use.MethodsA systematic review of the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases was completed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies with defined olfactory outcomes of patients treated for PVOD following medical, surgical, acupuncture, or olfactory training interventions were included. The Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual and Conference on Guideline Standardization (COGS) instrument recommendations were followed in accordance with a previously described, rigorous, iterative process to create an evidence‐based review with recommendations.ResultsFrom 552 initial candidate articles, 36 studies with data for 2183 patients with PVOD were ultimately included. The most common method to assess olfactory outcomes was Sniffin’ Sticks. Broad treatment categories included: olfactory training, systemic steroids, topical therapies, a variety of heterogeneous non‐steroidal oral medications, and acupuncture.ConclusionBased on the available evidence, olfactory training is a recommendation for the treatment of PVOD. The use of short‐term systemic and/or topical steroids is an option in select patients after careful consideration of potential risks of oral steroids. Though some pharmacological investigations offer promising preliminary results for systemic and topical medications alike, a paucity of high‐quality studies limits the ability to make meaningful evidence‐based recommendations for the use of these therapies for the treatment of PVOD.

AbstractObjectivesThe purpose of this article is to provide a state‐of‐the‐art review of the literature and summarize the latest publications on medical and surgical treatment of cystic fibrosis (CF) chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), with an emphasis on describing recent advancements in cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies.MethodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing the PubMed database with search phrases detailed within the body of the article. Abstracts were reviewed to include publications detailing medical, surgical, and CFTR modulating therapies for CF CRS. Findings from studies not previously reviewed and publications regarding CFTR modulators were emphasized.ResultsNo clear guidelines for treatment of CF CRS are available. Nasal saline rinses, topical steroids, topical antibiotics, and topical dornase alfa are reported medical therapies. Ivacaftor has some sinonasal symptomatic benefit. A new triple therapy CFTR modulator, elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor, is capable of treating 90% of patients with CF and has shown the greatest FEV1 improvement of any CFTR modulator yet. There is no clear consensus on surgical indications or technique, though aggressive surgery in recalcitrant disease has shown some symptomatic benefit. Endoscopic sinus surgery after lung transplantation may benefit some patients in whom the sinuses serve as a reservoir for recurrent pulmonary infections by decreasing rates of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome and improving 5 year survival.ConclusionAs lifespan increases for patients with CF, further investigation into medical therapy, CFTR modulator sinonasal outcomes, and surgical technique and outcomes for CF CRS is needed.Level of Evidence5.

BackgroundIn this study we aim to describe presenting characteristics and identify prognostic factors for disease resolution in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in the setting of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA).MethodsPatients evaluated at a tertiary care center with diagnoses of EGPA and CRS were identified. Descriptive statistics were obtained. Univariate analysis was used to search for prognostic factors associated with higher Lund‐Mackay score at presentation and disease resolution.ResultsForty‐four patients were included with a mean age of 52.7 (standard deviation, 14) years. Twenty‐one patients (47.7%) were female, all had a diagnosis of asthma, and 36 (83.7%) had eosinophils >10%. Common presenting symptoms for CRS included nasal discharge (87.9%) followed by nasal congestion (83.9%) and facial pain and pressure (83.8%). Medical management of CRS included systemic corticosteroids (93.2%) and systemic antibiotics (75%). Surgical intervention occurred in 29 patients (67%). Nine patients (20.5%) had resolution of sinus symptoms, including 4 with imaging confirmation. Fourteen patients (31.8%) had continued CRS, but with improved symptoms, whereas 9 patients (20.5%) had continued CRS with no improvement in symptoms. Eleven patients (25%) were lost to follow‐up and 4 (9.1%) died. Univariate analysis did not show antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positivity, presence of peripheral eosinophilia, gender, age, or absence of systemic therapy to be predictive of higher Lund‐Mackay score at presentation or predictive of disease resolution.ConclusionCRS in patients with EGPA is often refractory to medical and surgical management. Treatment of these patients should occur in a multidisciplinary setting.

AbstractBackgroundTo identify the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of malignancies involving the pterygopalatine fossa (PPF).MethodsFifty‐seven patients who underwent curative surgery for malignant tumor involving PPF were reviewed.ResultsThe rates for three‐year local control (LC), five‐year disease‐free survival (DFS) and five‐year overall survival (OS) were 55.4%, 34.5%, and 52.7%, respectively. Perineural invasion (PNI) of the maxillary nerve with facial numbness (symptomatic V2 PNI) (P = .04) and cranial involvement (P = .03) were predictors for poor OS. Symptomatic V2 PNI was also a significant predictor for poor LC (P = .05) and DFS (P = .03). Within the subgroup analysis of patients with pathologically confirmed V2 PNI, asymptomatic V2 PNI patients had significantly better LC (71.2% vs 31.8%, P = .05) and DFS (43.8% vs 17.3%, P = .05) compared to symptomatic patients.ConclusionMalignant tumors involving the PPF have diverse pathologies and a poor prognosis. Symptomatic V2 PNI may be an independent poor prognostic factor.

BackgroundThe objective of this study is to determine whether the infiltration of 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in addition to topical application of 1:1000 epinephrine significantly improves surgical field grading scale score over topical 1:1000 epinephrine alone.MethodsA prospective, double‐blind, randomized, controlled study was performed of 40 patients undergoing bilateral endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive infiltration with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine on 1 side of the nasal cavity vs plain saline on the other side in preparation for ESS. Both groups received topical application of 1:1000 epinephrine. Surgical videos were recorded and Wormald surgical field grading scale was assigned by 2 blinded reviewers. The number of extra 1:1000 epinephrine pledgets used during the surgery, estimated blood loss, and surgical duration were also recorded.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences in Wormald surgical field grading scale, number of extra pledgets used, or estimated blood loss between the nasal cavity side infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine in comparison to infiltration with saline. The side infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine had a reduced operative time compared to the side infiltrated with saline (p = 0.002). There were no differences in postoperative bleeding from questionnaire completed by patient at the first postoperative visit.ConclusionAddition of infiltration of 1% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:100,000 to topical application of epinephrine 1:1000 for preparation of ESS does not significantly improve surgical field of view compared to topical epinephrine alone.