Lal, Devyani

ABSTRACTObjectivesTransnasal endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation (TESPAL) has been proposed as a first‐line therapy for intractable epistaxis before utilizing posterior nasal packing and embolization. A specific procedure code for TESPAL was newly introduced in 2018, adding to two prior codes for procedural control of epistaxis. This study compares all‐time utilization of the TESPAL CPT code in Medicare beneficiaries with alternative procedural codes for epistaxis management.MethodsThe publicly available data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the 2013–2022 period was analyzed for the reporting of TESPAL (31241), transcatheter permanent occlusion or embolization of noncentral nervous system, head, or neck (61626), and endoscopic control of epistaxis (31238) codes. Welch two sample t‐test and linear regression were used to characterize CPT code utilization.ResultsFrom 2018 to 2022, TESPAL CPT code reporting averaged 378 instances annually, with a stable utilization trend (p = 0.432). CPT codes 61626 and 31238 averaged 1429 and 3779 instances annually, respectively. CPT 31238 showed a significant decline (p < 0.001), and CPT 61626 showed a stable trend (p = 0.082). There was a significant decline in CPT code 31238 use after 2018 (p < 0.01). CPT 61626 showed a significant increase in usage post‐2018 (t = 2.90, p = 0.044).ConclusionAfter an initial increase in 2019, TESPAL reporting flattened, while CPT 61626 (which includes all embolization in head and neck vessels) significantly increased post‐2018. As recent studies show significant advantages of TESPAL over embolization, these findings warrant further attention and study.Level of Evidence3.

ABSTRACTBackground/AimEosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a multisystemic disease associated with nasal polyposis. Multiple biologics are used for managing EGPA, including some approved for nasal polyps (NP). This study investigated real‐world biologic prescription patterns for EGPA and their impact on NP and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) use.MethodsEGPA patients with NP treated with a biologic at any Mayo Clinic site (January 2010 to January 2024) were identified by querying the unified electronic medical record. Patterns of biologic therapy, clinical course, impact on NP, and performance of ESS were studied.ResultsEighty patients were identified. Overall, 71 of 80 (88.75%) patients underwent ESS, with 62 of 80 (77.5%) undergoing 131 ESS procedures prior to biologic therapy. ESS for recalcitrant NP (47 episodes) was performed on 38 of 80 (47.5%) patients on biologics. Biologic monotherapy was used in 90% (72) of patients; mepolizumab (81.9%) was the most common, followed by rituximab (23.6%), benralizumab (18.1%), and dupilumab (12.5%). Switching of biologics was observed in 28 of 80 patients. Concurrent dual‐biologic therapy was used in eight (10%) patients. For patients on single‐agent biologic therapy, ESS was performed on 52.5% of patients on mepolizumab, 23.5% on rituximab, 42.8% on benralizumab, and 22.2% on dupilumab.ConclusionsMultidisciplinary multi‐modality treatment with biologics and ESS appeared to be the mainstay of controlling NP in EGPA. Mepolizumab was the most frequently used biologic. Dual biologic therapy was necessary in 10% of patients. Overall, 71 of 80 (88.75%) patients had ESS, with almost half the study population (47.5%) undergoing ESS after initiating biologic treatment.

BackgroundNasal septal perforations (NSP) can have a heterogeneous appearance on endoscopic examination with varying degrees of crusting, inflammatory change, and associated septal deviation. The clinical applicability of these findings as contributors to patient symptoms may be enhanced by use of a standardized assessment.MethodsVideo nasal endoscopy recordings were obtained from 40 patients with NSP. Five raters with varied levels of training ranging from a senior resident to an experienced septal perforation surgeon independently reviewed the videos for the following exam findings: crusting, scarring, granulation tissue, septal deviation, and edema. Scoring for each item was reported on a 3‐point (0–2) scale, and each reviewer repeated scoring at a 14‐day interval. Interrater and intrarater agreement were calculated using Fleiss kappa for each item and the total scores. Additionally, endoscopy scores were correlated with patient‐reported NOSE‐Perf symptom scores.ResultsInterrater agreement for the overall instrument was in the “fair‐to‐moderate” range with the following interrater agreement for each item: crusting (0.458–0.575), scarring (0.286–0.308), granulation (0.403–0.406), deviation (0.487–0.494), and edema (0.253–0.406). Intrarater agreement was generally “substantial” for individual items as well as the overall instrument (0.688). The NSP endoscopy scores were moderately correlated with NOSE‐Perf scores (r = 0.44, p = 0.008).ConclusionsAn endoscopic evaluation of NSP comprising five exam findings has acceptable interrater and intrarater reliability and correlates with patient‐reported outcomes. NSP endoscopy may be applied to future clinical studies for characterization of NSP and assessment of treatment outcomes.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 134:3049–3053, 2024

Key Points Combined endoscopic sinus surgery and nasal septal perforation repair is technically feasible. NOSE‐Perf is a recently developed patient‐reported outcome measure for nasal septal perforation. The decision to perform combined ESS and NSP repair should be made on a case‐by‐case basis.

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.

Objective To evaluate eosinophil peroxidase (EPX) as a biomarker for tissue levels of eosinophilia, cytokines, and chemokines within chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Methods Twenty‐eight subjects undergoing sinonasal surgery were prospectively enrolled. Ethmoid tissue was analyzed with an in‐house EPX immunoassay and a 48‐plex cytokine‐chemokine array. Clinical severity was assessed using SNOT‐22 and Lund‐Mackay scores. Subjects were grouped as follows: controls, polyp status (CRS with [CRSwNP] and without nasal polyps [CRSsNP]), tissue eosinophilia (eosinophilic CRS [eCRS], non‐eosinophilic CRS [neCRS]), or combinations thereof (eCRSwNP, eCRSsNP, neCRSsNP). eCRS was defined as >10 eosinophils per high power field (HPF). Subjects without CRS or asthma were enrolled as controls. Results EPX was elevated in CRSwNP compared to control ( p = 0.007), in eCRS compared to neCRS ( p = 0.002), and in eCRSwNP along with eCRSsNP compared to neCRSsNP ( p = 0.023, p = 0.015, respectively). eCRS displayed elevated IL‐5 compared to neCRS ( p = 0.005). No significant differences in EPX or IL‐5 were observed between eCRSwNP and eCRSsNP. IL‐5 was elevated in eCRSwNP ( p = 0.019) compared neCRSsNP. Area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.938 (95% CI, 0.835–1.00) for EPX and tissue eosinophilia, with an optimal cut‐point of 470 ng/mL being 100% specific and 81.25% sensitive for tissue eosinophilia. Linear regression revealed a strong correlation between EPX and IL‐5 (R 2 = 0.64, p < 0.001). Comparing EPX and IL‐5, only EPX displayed significant correlation with SNOT‐22 ( p = 0.04) and Lund‐Mackay score ( p = 0.004). Conclusion EPX is associated with tissue eosinophilia in CRS patients regardless of polyp status. EPX correlates with IL‐5 and could be potentially considered a biomarker for anti‐IL‐5 therapies. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope , 134:69–78, 2024

Key points There is no consensus on the extent of appropriate surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), particularly CRS without polyps (CRSsNP). There is wide heterogeneity in the definition of “limited” and “extensive” endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Studies on the appropriate extent of surgery for CRS are needed.

AbstractBackgroundBiological sex is increasingly recognized as a critical variable in health care. The authors reviewed the current literature regarding sex‐based differences in rhinology to summarize the data and identify critical knowledge gaps.MethodsA scoping review was conducted. Publications reporting sex‐based differences in anatomy, physiology, and pathology focusing on disease prevalence, disease burden, and outcomes in rhinology were identified.ResultsSeventy‐five relevant manuscripts were identified. While paranasal sinuses are of similar size at birth, they become larger in males leading to differences in ostium location. Females outperform males in olfactory identification but only in the 18‐ to 50‐year age group. Estrogen and progesterone administration can impact muscarinic and α1‐adrenergic nasal mucosa receptor density. Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and CRS without nasal polyps are more prevalent in females while CRS with nasal polyps is more prevalent in males. CRS symptom burden is higher in females before and after endoscopic sinus surgery; however, no difference in endoscopic sinus surgery utilization was found based on sex. Allergic rhinitis is more common in males before puberty and in females after puberty. Epistaxis is more prevalent in males and postmenopausal females compared with premenopausal females, perhaps from differences in sex‐hormonal and hypertension status. In nasopharyngeal carcinoma, the incidence of sinus abnormalities was higher in males than females.ConclusionsAlthough many sex‐based differences exist in rhinology, further research is necessary to offer evidence‐based treatment guidelines. Gonadal hormones should be studied as a therapeutic in rhinologic pathology as baseline physiologic differences exist such as those found in nasal mucosa receptor density.

ObjectiveRNA sequencing (transcriptomics) is used to study biological pathways. However, the yield of data depends on comparing well‐characterized cohorts. We compared tissue eosinophilia versus nasal polyp (NP) status as the metric to characterize transcriptomic mechanisms at play in eosinophilic and non‐eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) versus controls.MethodsRNA sequencing was conducted on sinonasal tissue samples of CRS and controls. Analyses were conducted based on polyp status [with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and without nasal polyps (CRSsNP)] as well as tissue eosinophil levels per high power field (eos/hpf)[non‐eosinophilic (<10 eos/hpf, neCRS) or eosinophilic (≥10 eos/hpf, eCRS)]. The yield of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and biological pathways through Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) were compared.ResultsCRS tissue differed from controls by 736 statistically significant DEGs. Both NP status and tissue eosinophilia were effective in differentiating CRS from controls and into two distinct subgroups. Statistically significant DEGs identified when comparing CRS by NP status were 60, whereas 110 DEGs were identified using eosinophil cutoff ≥10 and <10 eos/hpf. Additionally, heatmaps showed greater homogeneity within each CRS subgroup when analyzed by tissue eosinophilia versus NP status. On IPA, the IL‐17 signaling pathway was significantly different only by tissue eosinophilia status, not NP status, being higher in CRS <10 eos/hpf.ConclusionTissue eosinophilia is superior to an analysis by NP status for the study of CRS transcriptome by RNA sequencing in identifying DEGs. Classification of CRS samples by eosinophil counts agnostic of NP status may offer advantageous insights into CRS pathogenetic mechanisms.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 133:2480–2489, 2023