Opiate vs non-opiate prescription medication for pain control after endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE

Research indicates that most providers give opiates after endoscopic sinonasal surgery. The effectiveness of non-opiate medications after sinonasal surgery is poorly understood and most studies do not assess medication failure. This study compares oral opiate, oral opiate and topical steroid, and oral non-opiate pain control. Patient call-backs are used as a proxy for pain medication failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study compares three medication regiments after sinonasal surgery for 180 adults with chronic rhinosinusitis. Patients were instructed to take acetaminophen for mild pain. For moderate/severe pain, patients used: 1) oxycodone-acetaminophen, 2) oxycodone-acetaminophen + budesonide nasal rinses, or 3) meloxicam + acetaminophen. Patients were instructed to call clinic if pain was not controlled. Descriptive statistics compared cohorts. Chi-square tests compared call-backs between cohorts. Logistic regression adjusted for baseline differences in covariates, comorbidities, and operative sites.

RESULTS

Cohorts had similar age, sex distribution, disease features, and extent of surgery. The meloxicam cohort had less subjects with pain disorders. The oxycodone cohort had less subjects with diabetes, septoplasty, and turbinate reduction. After adjusting for baseline differences and using oxycodone as the reference group (n = 50), the odds of calling clinic for poorly controlled pain was 0.18 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.05-0.6) in the meloxicam cohort (n = 45) and 0.19 (95% CI:0.07-0.5) in the oxycodone + budesonide rinses cohort (n = 85).

CONCLUSION

In this study, both meloxicam and oxycodone + budesonide rinses were more effective at controlling pain after sinonasal surgery than oxycodone alone.

Corticosteroid Use in Otolaryngology: Current Considerations During the COVID-19 Era

OBJECTIVE

To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed advice on administering corticosteroids in otolaryngology during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, considering therapeutic efficacy, potential adverse effects, susceptibility to COVID-19, and potential effects on efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and guideline databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Guideline search strategies, supplemented by database searches on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy), sinonasal polyposis, laryngotracheal disorders, head and neck oncology, and pediatric otolaryngology, prioritizing systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and COVID-19-specific findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) reduce long-term morbidity in individuals with SSNHL and Bell's palsy, reduce acute laryngotracheal edema, and have benefit in perioperative management for some procedures. Topical or locally injected corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. SCSs have not shown long-term benefit for sinonasal disorders. SCSs are not a contraindication to vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted that these vaccines are safe for immunocompromised patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

SCS use for SSNHL, Bell's palsy, laryngotracheal edema, and perioperative care should follow prepandemic standards. Local or topical corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. Whether SCSs attenuate response to vaccination against COVID-19 or increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. Immunosuppression may lower vaccine efficacy, so immunocompromised patients should adhere to recommended infection control practices. COVID-19 vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson vaccines is safe for immunocompromised patients.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis Outcomes of Patients With Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease Treated With Budesonide Irrigations: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Pathophysiology-targeting treatments exist for aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) through aspirin desensitization and biologics, such as dupilumab. With increasing attention paid to these treatments, which may be associated with significant side effects and/or cost, there is little description of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) response to treatment with intranasal corticosteroids and saline irrigations in AERD.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of intranasal budesonide irrigations for the treatment of CRSwNP in AERD.

METHODS

This is an observational study of 14 AERD patients presenting to a rhinology clinic for CRS who were treated with twice daily high volume, low pressure irrigations with 240 mL of saline to which a 0.5 mg/2 mL respule of budesonide was added. All participants completed a 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) at enrollment and at follow up 1 to 6 months later. Polyp scores were also calculated at each time point.

RESULTS

SNOT-22 scores ranged from 26 to 98 (median: 40.5) at enrollment and 3 to 85 (median: 38.5) at follow-up. Polyp scores ranged from 2 to 6 (median: 4) at enrollment at 0 to 6 (median: 2) at follow-up. Over the treatment period, change in SNOT-22 score ranged from -38 to 16 (median: -18) and change in polyp score ranged from -2 to 0 (median: -0.5). Approximately 57% of participants experienced at least 1 minimal clinically important difference in SNOT-22 score and 21% of participants had a SNOT-22 score <20 at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Medical management with intranasal corticosteroids and saline irrigations alone leads to significant improvement in sinonasal symptomatology in a subset of AERD.

Treatment options for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Background: The management of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is evolving, with an emphasis on treating the underlying type 2 inflammation. Objective: The objective was to summarize the updated evidence-based medical and surgical treatment recommendations for CRSwNP, including the position of biologics in the treatment algorithm. Methods: This review compared and contrasted the therapeutic recommendations presented by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 and the International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis 2021. Results: The long-term use of intranasal corticosteroids and the short-term use of oral corticosteroids are strongly recommended, whereas corticosteroid-eluting implants are considered an option. Although the use of saline solution rinses is recommended, there is uncertainty as to whether irrigation is more effective than sprays. Oral aspirin (ASA) desensitization, followed by ASA ≥ 300 mg daily for patients with ASA-exacerbated respiratory disease may be considered. In general, the use of antifungal agents offers no benefit and potential harm. Although the use of oral antibiotics for an acute exacerbation is still debated, oral and topical antibiotics are discouraged for subacute or chronic use. Antileukotrienes are inferior to intranasal corticosteroids and are unlikely to provide added benefit when used concomitantly. It is unlikely that the benefit of oral antihistamines and decongestants outweigh the potential harm. Dupilumab is recommended for severe CRSwNP when consensus-determined criteria are met. Omalizumab may be an option with concomitant poorly controlled asthma. Mepolizumab and reslizumab may be used, particularly in patients with concomitant uncontrolled asthma. In allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, oral and topical antifungals, antileukotrienes, allergen immunotherapy, and omalizumab are therapeutic options. Although surgical intervention is recognized to be of benefit for CRSwNP, there are no evidence-based criteria to indicate when maximum medical treatment has failed. Conclusion: An evidence-based CRSwNP treatment algorithm for when to recommend surgery and/or initiate or discontinue biologics to maximize quality of life and cost-effectiveness is still lacking.

Yardstick for the medical management of chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory condition of the paranasal sinuses defined by classic symptoms, imaging findings, or endoscopic findings. There are a growing number of emerging pharmacologic therapies being evaluated to treat patients with CRS, some of which have gained indication status in the United States. There have not been updated treatment guidelines published in the United States however since 2014. This document is meant to serve as an updated expert consensus document for the pharmacologic management of patients with CRS. We review available data focusing on prospective clinical trials on oral and intranasal corticosteroids, nasal irrigation, biologics, antibiotics, and allergy immunotherapy for CRS both with and without nasal polyposis, including specific therapies for aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease-associated CRS and allergic fungal CRS. There are multiple options to treat CRS, and clinicians should be knowledgeable on the efficacy and risks of these available therapies. Allergists-immunologists now have various therapies available to treat patients with CRS.

The possibility of short-term hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression with high-volume, high-dose nasal mometasone irrigation in postsurgical patients with chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Medically refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is often treated with functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and high-volume steroid nasal irrigation. While budesonide is the most common steroid irrigation for this indication, mometasone has a superior pharmacokinetic profile, which may allow dose escalation. The safety and efficacy of mometasone at higher concentrations than previously used in treating CRS have not been explored.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from a tertiary level clinic between June 2018 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria included adults (>18 years); CRS diagnosis; previous FESS; pre-treatment morning cortisol within normal range; minimum of twice daily high-volume sinonasal mometasone irrigations (total dose of 4 mg) for 12 weeks; and post-treatment morning cortisol measured within 2 weeks following the study period. Patients with potential for endogenous or exogenous disruption of the HPA axis were excluded.

RESULTS

14 patients were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. In all but one patient, pre- and post-treatment morning cortisol levels were not significantly different and were within normal limits (6.7-25.4 μg/dL). Following an uninterrupted 12-week treatment course, no evidence of HPA axis suppression was found (P = 0.915). The single patient who was found to have a low (1.3 μg/dL) post-treatment morning serum cortisol level reportedly received an intraarticular steroid shot several days prior to the blood draw. She remained asymptomatic and her rechecked serum cortisol was within normal limits at 12.3 μg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

High-volume 2 mg twice daily sinonasal mometasone irrigations did not cause HPA axis suppression in a representative sample of patients with refractory CRS post-FESS with normal baseline cortisol levels.

Nasal irrigation with Glycyrrhiza glabra extract for treatment of allergic rhinitis - A study of in vitro, in vivo and clinical trial

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Glycyrrhiza glabra, a family of licorice and a traditional Chinese medicine with sweet taste and favorable smell, has anti-inflammatory, anti-allergic and immunomodulatory functions.

AIM OF THE STUDY

We developed a licorice extract (LE) by using glycyrrhiza glabra and administered it through nasal irrigation to treat allergic rhinitis (AR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LE was prepared into extract powder, and the anti-inflammatory effect of the LE was evaluated by calcium ionophore-induced activated mast cell model (in vitro). Then, local passive anaphylaxis assays were applied to investigate the anti-IgE-mediated allergic reaction of the LE in mice (in vivo). A developed LE was administered through nasal irrigation to treat AR in clinic settings. A total of 60 participants diagnosed with AR were included in this clinical trial; they were randomly assigned to three interventions: licorice nasal irrigation (LNI), corticosteroid nasal irrigation (CNI), and saline nasal irrigation (SNI). They performed nasal irrigation once a day for 1 month. Both subjective questionnaires (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test [SNOT-22] and visual analog scale [VAS]) and objective examinations (acoustic rhinometry and nasal endoscopy) were used for effectiveness assessments.

RESULTS

All three interventions could improve SNOT-22 scores, but the effects of LNI and CNI were more significant. According to VAS scores for nasal blockage, rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal pruritus, postnasal discharge, and olfactory disturbance, the effect of LNI was superior to those of CNI and SNI. The results of rhinometry revealed that LNI significantly improved nasal resistance. Endoscopic analysis showed that both LNI and CNI, but not SNI, could significantly improve turbinate hypertrophy. Moreover, the best procedural comfort was found for LNI, which had no side effects or complications during the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

LNI is a natural, safe, and innovative therapy that can effectively treat AR. Its effect is superior to those of CNI and SNI, and it has greatly improved procedural comfort.

Phenotypes of Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a complex heterogeneous disease with different phenotypes and endotypes. Recent advances in our understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms of CRS endotypes have led to the introduction of effective biologic agents for CRS management. Traditionally, CRS phenotypes have been divided into with or without nasal polyps depending on the presence of polyps. Although this classification does not reflect the various endotypes that are recently emerging, it is simple and easily recognized by clinicians. Other phenotypes of CRS are fungal rhinosinusitis (including invasive and noninvasive subtypes), infectious rhinosinusitis, aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease, cystic fibrosis, pediatric CRS, and CRS associated with systemic diseases. This article reviews the diagnostic approaches and up-to-date treatment strategies for each CRS phenotype with the hope that a better understanding of endotypes will result in a more scientific understanding of phenotypes and precise, personalized treatments.

Comparison of Intranasal Steroid Application Using Nasal Saline Irrigation and a Mucosal Atomization Device to Treat Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Introduction: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a disease that can significantly reduce patients' quality of life (QoL). Intranasal steroid therapy is the most commonly used treatment for CRS. There are many evaluation tools dedicated to assessing CRS patients' QoL, but none of them evaluates QoL during local steroid therapy. Mucosal atomization devices (MADs) and nasal saline irrigation (NSI) are effective and safe methods of applying intranasal steroids for CRS patients. Materials and Methods: The sample population for this prospective study comprised 43 CRS patients. Following endoscopic sinus surgery, all participants received intranasal steroids administered via an MAD, followed by NSI for 1.5 months. Each participant completed the SNOT-22 (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcomes Test) score and a new questionnaire, the Complementary Topical Nasal Drug Delivery Questionnaire (the Complementary Questionnaire), at the end of 3 months of intranasal steroid therapy. Results: The patients' responses in both the SNOT-22 score and the Complementary Questionnaire revealed significant differences in their adverse experiences. The patients who received intranasal steroid treatment using NSI experienced more frequently delayed nasal drainage, higher frequency of ear symptoms, and facial pain/pressure, while those whose therapy was administered using an MAD reported complaints such as nasal irritation, nasal dryness, and postnasal drip with unpleasant taste/smell. Conclusion: We used the Complementary Questionnaire as an effective tool for assessment of the QoL of CRS patients. The SNOT-22 score and the Complementary Questionnaire make it possible to select an intranasal applicator tailored to a CRS patient's specific complaints.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021

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.

Use of Off-Label Nasal Steroid Irrigations in Long-Term Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVE

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses and mucosa. Topical nasal corticosteroids are a mainstay treatment for CRS by reducing sinonasal inflammation and improving mucociliary clearance. However, topical corticosteroids have limited paranasal distribution, and patient response to treatment has been variable in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Thus, there is significant interest in evaluating the efficacy of nasal steroids delivered by nasal irrigation in order to improve penetration and absorption of topical steroids into the sinonasal mucosa. In this review, we discuss the use of off-label nasal steroid irrigations in the management of CRS.

METHODS

A review of clinical trials evaluating the use of nasal steroid irrigations for CRS in the PubMed electronic database was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 12 clinical studies identified, 10 evaluated budesonide irrigations while the remaining 2 focused on mometasone. The overwhelming majority of studies for both budesonide and mometasone supported the use of nasal irrigations with corticosteroids over nasal corticosteroid sprays alone. However, the heterogeneity in study design, patient cohort, and volume of steroid irrigation limit the interpretations of these studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal irrigation with corticosteroids is beneficial and safe for the treatment of CRS. Future RCTs controlling for type of surgical intervention, CRS pheno- and endo-type, as well as dosing and duration of nasal corticosteroid irrigations are warranted.

Current Perspective on Nasal Delivery Systems for Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis is an upper respiratory disease during which topical drug treatment via the nasal cavity is the most actively utilized therapeutic strategy. In addition to steroids, antibiotics, and antifungal agents, which are widely used in clinical practice, research on novel topical agents to improve the bacterial biofilm or mucociliary clearance remains ongoing. Moreover, owing to the complex structure of the nasal cavity, the effects of nasal drug delivery vary depending on factors related to delivery fluid dynamics, including device, volume, and compounds. In this article, we review methods and compounds that have been applied to chronic rhinosinusitis management and introduce recent advances and future perspectives in nasal drug delivery for upper respiratory diseases.

[Management strategies for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in adults]

INTRODUCTION

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is one of the categories of chronic rhinosinusitis and is defined by the presence of bilateral polyps. It is frequently associated with other conditions (asthma, atopy, aspirin intolerance), which worsen its prognosis.

STATE OF ART

The pathophysiology of CRSwNP is still poorly understood. The genesis of polyps is thought to be based on an initial epithelial lesion caused by environmental factors in the context of self-maintained chronic local inflammation. Multiple local and general factors can be involved in this inflammation, which is mainly of Th2 type in Europe. Abnormalities of the epithelial barrier and the immune system (eosinophilia, cytokines, T and B lymphocytes), genetic factors and pathogens, including Staphylococcus aureus, have been incriminated. The treatment of CRSwNP is mainly based on the application of local corticosteroids. Surgery remains an important part of patient management where CRSwNP becomes resistant to topical therapy. The management of CRSwNP may be at a turning point thanks to the arrival of biological therapies (anti-IgE, anti-IL-5, anti-IL-4/IL-13) the initial results of which are promising.

PERSPECTIVES/CONCLUSIONS

With the new concept of endotypes, current avenues of research are moving towards a better understanding of the inflammatory mechanisms of CRSwNP. Immunotherapy appears to be a promising future for the treatment of CRSwNP.

Long-Term Sinonasal Carriage of Staphylococcus aureus and Anti-Staphylococcal Humoral Immune Response in Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis

We investigated Staphylococcus aureus diversity, genetic factors, and humoral immune responses against antigens via genome analysis of S. aureus isolates from chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients in a long-term follow-up. Of the 42 patients who provided S. aureus isolates and serum for a previous study, 34 could be included for follow-up after a decade. Clinical examinations were performed and bacterial samples were collected from the maxillary sinus and nares. S. aureus isolates were characterized by whole-genome sequencing, and specific anti-staphylococcal IgG in serum was determined using protein arrays. S. aureus was detected in the nares and/or maxillary sinus at both initial inclusion and follow-up in 15 of the 34 respondents (44%). Three of these (20%) had S. aureus isolates from the same genetic lineage as at inclusion. A low number of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were identified when comparing isolates from nares and maxillary sinus collected at the same time point. The overall change of antibody responses to staphylococcal antigens over time showed great variability, and no correlation was found between the presence of genes encoding antigens and the corresponding anti-staphylococcal IgG in serum; thus our findings did not support a role, in CRS, of the specific S. aureus antigens investigated.

A multicenter survey on the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices in rhinosinusitis patients

BACKGROUND

Nasal irrigation is widely used as an adjunctive treatment for rhinosinusitis. However, there is little information available regarding the efficacy of the devices used in this procedure. The objective of this study was thus to evaluate the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices based on the experiences of patients with rhinosinusitis.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter survey study between November 2017 and December 2019. The questionnaire was developed based on the available literature and expert opinion and submitted to the otolaryngology residents and staff of each center as well as those in their networks.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighteen patients were enrolled in this study: 76 with acute viral rhinosinusitis (18%), 53 with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (13%), 156 with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (37%), and 133 with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (32%). We found that high-volume devices were most effective in helping to clear secretion in patients with acute viral rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps, and acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .017, .009, .002, respectively) and in reducing post-nasal drip in those with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .040). There were no statistically significant differences among devices in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal irrigation with high-volume devices was an effective treatment for rhinosinusitis and was more effective at clearing nasal secretion and reducing post-nasal drip than that with other types of devices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2C.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps management in the age of biologics

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis is one of the most common medical conditions seen in the U.S. population. Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) in adults has predominately a type 2 inflammatory endotype that usually is treated with medical management that consists of inhaled corticosteroids, saline solution irrigation, oral corticosteroid bursts, and, at times, leukotriene antagonists and antibiotics. If medical management fails, then surgical intervention is usually recommended. Various biologics that target type 2 inflammation are now available, which have been or will be approved for use in these patients. Objective: To determine where biologics that affect the type 2 pathway fit into the algorithm of treatment for CRSwNP. Methods: A review of the literature on standard-of-care measures and surgical interventions in CRSwNP and an analysis of recent studies on the efficacy and safety of biologics in this condition. Results: Standard of care with medication and surgical interventions fail in some patients with CRSwNP. Biologics that affect the type 2 inflammatory pathway led to a decrease in nasal polyp size, improved nasal congestion, and improved quality of life both in patients who had surgery and those who had not had surgery for CRSwNP. Also, they showed efficacy and safety in patients whether or not they had comorbid asthma. These agents do not cure the patient with CRSwNP, and will be required chronically for control. Conclusion: Shared decision-making should be used in determining the use of certain medications, surgical management, and biologics in patients with CRSwNP. In patients for whom surgery has already failed and in patients with moderate-to-severe CRSwNP who have other type 2 comorbidities, e.g., asthma, a trial of biologics is a rational course.

Adult chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) occurs in >10% of the adult population in Europe and the USA and can be differentiated into CRS without nasal polyps and CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Both phenotypes are characterized by a high disease burden and an overlapping spectrum of symptoms, with facial pain and loss of smell being the most differentiating. Great progress has been made in the understanding of CRS pathophysiology: from the epithelium and epithelial-mesenchymal transition to innate and adaptive immunity pathways and, finally, on the role of eosinophils and Staphylococcus aureus in the persistence of disease. Although clinical manifestations and diagnostic tools (including nasal endoscopy and imaging) have undergone major changes over the past few years, management (including pharmacotherapy, surgery and biologics) has experienced enormous progress based on the growing knowledge of key mediators in severe CRSwNP. The introduction of endotyping has led to a differentiation of 'tailored' surgical approaches, focusing on the mucosal concept in those with severe CRSwNP and on the identification of patients eligible for extended surgery and possibly biologics in the future.

Using 3D printed sinonasal models to visualize and optimize personalized sinonasal sinus irrigation strategies

BACKGROUND

Topical sinus irrigations (neti-pot, squeeze bottles) play a critical role in the management of sinonasal disease. However, due to intricate nasal anatomy, penetration of topical irrigations to targeted sinus regions may be highly variable, and difficult to objectively predict. Variables, including head positions, injection angles, flow rates, etc. may vary significantly depending on the individual's anatomy.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to propose a novel idea: using a 3D printed model of sinonasal cavities to visualize and develop a patient-specific irrigation strategy.

METHODS

As a proof of concept, 3D replicas of one patient's sinonasal cavities pre- and post-surgery were printed with a Form2 SLA 3D printer based on their CT scans. The setup included rubber/silicon seals attached to the model's nostrils to create a watertight seal with the irrigation device and food color dye added for better visualization of irrigation results.

RESULTS

Irrigations were performed on the 3D models with various head positions, injection angles, and flow rates, and were successful to determine the optimal strategy to targeted sinuses. Significant differences were observed between different targeted sinuses and between pre and post-surgery models.

CONCLUSION

With more affordable 3D printing, this technology may potentially improve patient care and patient education, allowing clinicians and patients to develop a personalized irrigation strategy and have visual confirmation.

A Scholarly Review of the Safety and Efficacy of Intranasal Corticosteroids Preparations in the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this scholarly review is to present an update of the efficacy, safety, and distribution of intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) in the context of treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review from 1999 to 2020 of MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE databases was performed, using a comprehensive search strategy. Studies reporting on efficacy, safety, and distribution of all INCS formulations, both Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and non-FDA approved, were reviewed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

High-level evidence publications and position papers support the role of INCS in medical treatment for CRS. Significant improvement in disease-specific and general quality of life measures is observed with all formulations of INCS. Overall, the use of both FDA and published non-FDA INCS appears to be safe. Several novel distribution devices might improve penetration to specific areas within the sinuses.

The Role of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps

Biologic therapy is a new treatment option for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Currently, the only biologic with Food and Drug Administration-approval status for CRSwNP is dupilumab. Several other biologics are likely to be approved for CRSwNP, including mepolizumab and omalizumab, based on their promising phase 3 trial results. The role of biologics in the treatment paradigm requires consideration of multiple factors that have yet to be clearly established. This includes identifying patients most appropriate for biologic therapy while considering long-term safety and cost-effectiveness in the context of patient preferences and goals.

Long-Term Clinical Follow-Up of Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Objective:

This study comprised a long-term follow-up of a cohort of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) regarding clinical features and symptomatology.

Methods:

Data from 42 patients with CRS were available from a previous study. Forty of these patients were alive and were contacted for inclusion after approximately 10 years. Patients completed a questionnaire about disease and symptoms, and underwent a clinical examination.

Results:

Thirty-four patients (85%) responded and could be included and evaluated. For the participants in this follow-up study median length of time between initial inclusion (C1) and follow-up (C2) was 11 years (range: 8-15). In some patients the CRS shifted phenotype over time, from CRS with nasal polyposis to CRS without nasal polyposis or vice versa. The median total visual analogue score for combined sinonasal symptoms for all patients was statistically significantly reduced at follow-up. For individual patients, scores for nasal congestion, nasal discharge, facial pressure, and hyposmia were also statistically significantly reduced. The most frequently reported symptom-relieving treatments were nasal steroids and saline rinsing of the nose. Self-reported general quality of life was statistically significantly improved at C2 compared to C1.

Conclusion:

At long-term follow-up, symptoms were generally reduced and patients reported an improved quality of life. Patients can be given hope for eventual symptom relief. CRS is a chronic condition that seems to harbor the ability to alter its phenotype after several years. Topical corticosteroids and saline rinsing of the nose should be emphasized, since patients consider these treatments to be of high value.

Role of Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyposis: State of the Art Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature regarding the role of biologics in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Review, ClinicalTrials.gov.

REVIEW METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature on clinical studies investigating the efficacy of emerging biologics in CRSwNP, with a focus on randomized controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

There appears to be promising evidence to support the safety and efficacy of biologics in CRSwNP with and without asthma for select patients. However, additional large-scale randomized studies with longer follow-up are necessary to determine which patients would benefit the most from these novel systemic treatments.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis refractory to medical and surgical therapy remains a challenging clinical problem for otolaryngologists. However, emerging biologic therapies may offer a new therapeutic option for such patients with recalcitrant disease.

Phenotypes in Chronic Rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a heterogenous disease process affecting a significant proportion of the population and impacting quality of life and productivity. Historically, CRS has been classified broadly into CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP). Increased understanding regarding unique presentations of CRS subsets and their underlying inflammatory profiles has led to a new system for classifying CRS phenotypes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Consideration of CRS phenotypes has traditionally been a key factor in determining treatment paradigms. Under a new phenotype classification system, physical findings will continue to drive treatment decisions, but with more precision. Recent rapidly accumulated knowledge indicates that the broad categorization of CRSwNP or CRSsNP is no longer clinically useful. Reorganization of CRS phenotypes and their underlying endotypes will lead to more targeted and efficacious therapy.

Clinical Research Needs for the Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps in the New Era of Biologics: A National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Workshop

The development of biologics targeting various aspects of type 2 inflammation for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) will provide clinicians with powerful tools to help treat these patients. However, other therapies are also available, and positioning of biologics in a management algorithm will require comparative trials. In November 2019, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases convened a workshop to consider potential future trial designs. Workshop participants represented a wide spectrum of clinical specialties, including otolaryngology, allergy, and pulmonary medicine, as well as expertise in CRSwNP pathophysiology and in trial methodology and statistics. The workshop discussed the current state of knowledge in CRSwNP and considered the advantages and disadvantages of various clinical trial or observational study designs and various clinical outcomes. The output from this workshop, which is presented in this report, will hopefully provide investigators with adequate information and ideas to design future studies and answer critical clinical questions. It will also help clinicians understand the current state of the management of CRSwNP and its gaps and be more able to interpret the new information to come.

Topography of polyp recurrence in eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (eCRS) is an inflammatory endotype of CRS. Contemporary treatment includes creation of a "neo-sinus" cavity and postoperative corticosteroid irrigations. Not all patients gain control with local therapy. This study aims to determine, in patients with polyp recurrence, the most common sinuses involved.

METHODS

A prospective case-series was conducted on consecutive adult (≥18 years) post-FESS eCRS patients followed for a minimum of 12 months. All patients had a neo-sinus cavity created surgically and used corticosteroid irrigations daily for 3-6 months, then tapered to disease control. Sinus cavities were assessed by endoscopy on last follow-up. Polyp recurrence was defined as a score of 5 or 6 in the MLMES in ≥3 sinus cavities. Patient-reported outcomes based on SNOT22 and NSS, frequency of corticosteroid irrigations, and courses of systemic antibiotics and corticosteroid were collected. The pattern of sinus involvement was analyzed.

RESULT

A total of 342 sinus cavities were assessed (mean ± standard deviation, 54.9 ± 13.4 years, 43.2% female). Polyp recurrence occurred in 4.3% (6.4% of patients, n = 7 unilateral) of sinus cavities. Frontal and ethmoid sinus cavities were most affected in those with polyp recurrence, compared to the maxilla and sphenoid (100% vs 100% vs 53% vs 53%, p < 0.01). Although those patients with polyp recurrence utilized more systemic corticosteroids courses per year (0.4 ± 0.4 vs 0.1 ± 0.3, p < 0.01), the use of corticosteroid irrigations was similar (% >4/week; 66.7% vs 48.9%, p = 0.13). Prior surgery was more common in patients with polyp recurrence (86.7% vs 53.5%, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The frontal and ethmoid sinuses were most affected in those patients with polyp recurrence. Whether the disease is more active in this location or topical therapy has limited access requires further evaluation.

Current and Future Treatments of Rhinitis and Sinusitis

Advances in understanding the pathogenic mechanisms of both rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis have resulted in new treatment options, especially for chronic rhinosinusitis. A review of relevant medical and surgical clinical studies shows that intranasal corticosteroids, antihistamines, and allergen immunotherapy continue to be the best treatments for chronic rhinitis. Dupilumab is the first biologic approved for chronic rhinosinusitis with polyps. Omalizumab, mepolizumab, and benralizumab may have a future role in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Novel corticosteroid delivery devices such as an exhalation delivery system for fluticasone and bioabsorbable sinus implants provide enhanced and localized distribution of corticosteroids. Surgical management tailored to the underlying disease process improves clinical outcomes in chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyposis. Advances in the understanding of the heterogeneous nature of rhinitis and rhinosinusitis have resulted in more precise treatments. Improving the understanding of different endotypes should provide better knowledge to determine appropriate current and new therapies to treat these diseases.

Topical corticosteroid irrigations in chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has previously been thought to occur secondary to infectious or obstructive etiologies. However, in recent years, primary CRS has been more discretely defined as diffuse airway inflammation, similar to asthma. Adequate medical and surgical therapy are needed to control the inflammation. Our purpose in this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical corticosteroid treatment.

METHODS

A focused literature review was conducted and we identified 11 original articles from the years 2013-2018 evaluating safety or efficacy of topical corticosteroid irrigations.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were identified. One study found significant benefit between corticosteroid irrigations versus corticosteroid sprays. Two studies found significant benefit between corticosteroid irrigations compared to saline irrigations while two did not. One study found significant improvement in certain patient populations when using corticosteroid irrigations compared to no irrigation. Five studies found no significant increase in risk of adverse side effects with the use of topical corticosteroids.

CONCLUSION

Many factors are associated with efficacious and adequate treatment of primary CRS. The pathology must be correctly diagnosed and be inflammatory in nature. The treatment paradigm should include wide and complete endoscopic sinus surgery for the adequate delivery of topical therapy. Topical therapy should be delivered in large-volume, low-pressure devices with adequate dosing. Although there is some systemic absorption, multiple studies have demonstrated that long-term, daily use of topical corticosteroids does not increase intraocular pressure, suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, or increase the risk of subcapsular cataracts. Therefore, topical corticosteroid irrigations should be considered a part of first-line medical treatment in postsurgical CRS patients.

Cadaveric Assessment of the Efficacy of Sinus Irrigation After Staged Clearance of the Medial Maxillary Wall

Background

Nasal irrigation is a significant component of effective medical management in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Irrigations facilitate distribution of topical medical therapies to affected mucosal surfaces and lavage of hypersecretory mucin and inflammatory products.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of cadaveric nasal irrigation distribution and force following different surgical techniques commonly used to open the maxillary sinus.

Methods

Fresh human cadaver heads were dissected sequentially with uncinectomy, maxillary antrostomy, endoscopic maxillary mega-antrostomy, and modified endoscopic medial maxillectomy. After each surgical technique was performed, the corresponding nasal cavity was irrigated with 240 mL irrigation bottles containing 1/1000 10% fluroscein-labeled free water. A nasal endoscope passed through the canine fossa into a fixed position in the maxillary sinus recorded the extent of sinus irrigation. These videos then underwent blinded assessment by 2 observers assessing for irrigation sinus penetration (scored as 0–4) and force (0–2). Ordinal correlation scores were assessed using Kendall’s tau-B.

Results

A total of 17 sinuses (age 53.4 ± 12.6, 36.4% female) were assessed. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between increasing extent of maxillary sinus dissection and both sinus penetration and force as assessed by both observers (Kendall’s tau-B P < .0001).

Conclusion

Increasing the extent of surgical dissection appears to improve penetration and force of the nasal irrigation into the maxillary sinus. This study suggests that while a standard maxillary antrostomy may be sufficient to achieve good topical therapy distribution, more extensive surgery such as a modified medial maxillectomy may be required for sufficient force of sinus lavage.

Impact of Draf III, Draf IIb, and Draf IIa frontal sinus surgery on nasal irrigation distribution

BACKGROUND

Delivery of topical pharmacotherapy to the paranasal sinuses remains integral to the management of chronic rhinosinusitis. The frontal sinus remains a difficult access site for irrigations, often limited by its position relative to the nostril and ethmoid sinus. In view of the previous demonstration of improved frontal sinus irrigation with Draf III vs Draf IIa, in this work we sought to evaluate topical access of Draf IIb relative to Draf IIa and Draf III modification of the frontal sinus outflow tract.

METHODS

Unfixed human cadaver heads were dissected using Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies. Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies were performed in progressive sequence on each cadaver head. Nasal irrigation fluid access to the frontal sinus was tested after each successive frontal sinus intervention. Irrigations were performed using Frankfort horizontal and vertex positioning. Blinded reviewers were then asked to evaluate nasal irrigation access based on an ordinal scale.

RESULTS

Eight cadaveric specimens (age, 78 ± 12.3 years; 62.5% female) were assessed. The greatest distribution scores were recorded by Draf III, then IIb, and then IIa (90.7% vs 81.3% vs 50.1%; p < 0.001). Similarly, the rate of lavage was greatest with Draf III (50% vs 12.5% vs 12.5%). Vertex positioning and increasing volume trended toward improved distribution but did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Adequate delivery of topical therapy to the paranasal sinuses by nasal irrigation remains critical in the postoperative state. Although increasing the dimensions of the frontal recess improves nasal irrigation delivery, the Draf III procedure provides the optimal delivery of pharmacotherapy in those with frontal sinus disease.

Mometasone absorption in cultured airway epithelium

BACKGROUND

Topical mometasone is frequently used as an intranasal spray, on drug-eluting stents, and compounded by specialty pharmacies as a sinus rinse. A typical sinus rinse contains 1.2 mg of mometasone dissolved in 240 mL of buffered saline and is flushed through the sinonasal cavity. The mometasone irrigation rapidly flows to the contralateral sinonasal cavity or the nasopharynx with a contact time on the order of 5 to 10 seconds. However, no information is available on the absorption rate of topical mometasone on the sinonasal surface.

METHODS

To determine the absorption characteristics of mometasone, we harvested nasal epithelium from 2 healthy donors and differentiated them into a mature ciliated epithelium on Millicell membranes. We applied mometasone to the apical surface for various time intervals and then rinsed off non-absorbed mometasone with phosphate-buffered saline. Millicell membranes with the adherent epithelial cells were then harvested and stored in guanidine hydrochloride for quantification using high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

Fifty percent of the maximal absorption occurred after an average of 38 minutes after application, and maximal absorption occurred after an average of 114 minutes.

CONCLUSION

Our data provide an estimate for rates of absorption of mometasone applied to the sinonasal cavity and suggest that the absorption rates poorly match contact time during saline lavage.

Effects of sphenoid surgery on nasal irrigation delivery

BACKGROUND

Nasal irrigation is an important component of medical management in chronic rhinosinusitis. Nasal irrigations facilitate topical medication of therapies and lavage of mucin. In this study we aim to compare the influence of increasing surgical sphenoid openings on the distribution, force, and clearance of nasal irrigations.

METHODS

A study was performed on fresh-frozen adult cadaver heads. The surgical ostium was modified on one side via a simple sphenoidotomy, a sphenoid sinusectomy (type 1), and sphenoid sinusectomy (type 3a). The nasal cavity was irrigated using a 240-mL squeeze bottle with 0.1% fluoroscein. An endoscope passed through the contralateral side through the sphenoid septum recorded the irrigation. Videos were recorded and blindly assessed. The distribution was defined as either no irrigation, less than one third of the sinus, less than or equal to two thirds of the sinus, or the complete sinus. The force was defined as minimal, minor, or major. The clearance was defined as no residual, less than one third of volume, less than or equal to two thirds of volume, and more than two thirds volume. Ordinal correlation scores were assessed using the Kendall tau-B test.

RESULTS

Nine specimens (sphenoid sinuses) were assessed (44.4% female; age, 75.0 ± 12.7 years). The use of a sphenoid sinusectomy or larger produced better distribution (percent specimens with more than one third: 100% vs 59%, p < 0.01), more force (percent major: 83% vs 29%, p < 0.01), and better clearance (percent with one third or less remaining: 56% vs 18%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Increasing sphenoid ostial size improves nasal irrigation penetration. We propose that greater sphenoid sinusectomy size allows for improved lavage and irrigation penetration. Complete removal of the anterior face appears to mitigate pooling of irrigation.

Clinically relevant phenotypes in chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a complex disease that incorporates many different conditions. Currently, primary CRS is considered a disease of broad airway inflammation, however, the previous classification of CRS with and without nasal polyposis fails to adequately classify patients based upon their etiology of illness. Our aim with this review is discuss the clinical presentation, radiology, endoscopy, histopathology, and treatment algorithm of three different phenotypes of primary CRS: central compartment atopic disease, eosinophilic CRS, and non-eosinophilic CRS.

METHODS

A narrative review of a tertiary rhinology center's research themes and how they are applied to clinical protocols and practice was assessed.

DISCUSSION

Diagnosis and treatment of upper and lower airway conditions become increasingly important as phenotypes and endotypes are being described. There are well-described therapies to treat the different phenotypes of CRS, based upon the presumed underlying cause of the inflammatory process. Research continues to shed more light on different endotypes and phenotypes of airway inflammation, however, clinical differentiation of CRS can be applied in clinic practice with three simple phenotypes of CRS. Understanding these different phenotypes and their etiologies allows for further management beyond the 'maximum medical therapy and then surgery' approach that has often been used in the management of CRS.

Mometasone furoate sinus implant - a new targeted approach to treating recurrent nasal polyp disease

Introduction: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a broad heterogeneous inflammatory disorder of the nose and paranasal sinuses, resulting from the dysfunctional interplay between host immunity, defective epithelial barrier, and environmental factors. CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is considered a more severe clinical phenotype with greater burden of symptoms and higher relapse rate, especially with comorbid asthma or aspirin sensitivity. Available treatment options after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) - systemic corticosteroids or revision surgery - have significant risks and limitations. Areas covered: Bioabsorbable, steroid-eluting implants have been studied extensively for the ability to dilate and re-establish sinus patency by the localized, controlled delivery of topical corticosteroids to diseased sinonasal lining and nasal polyps. This review provides a comprehensive, up to date analysis of the literature regarding a novel, office-based, mometasone furoate (MF) sinus implant that may treat patients with recurrent CRSwNP after ESS. Expert commentary: Clinical evidence has demonstrated the safety and efficacy of steroid-eluting implant in the reduction of polyp size, symptom burden, and the need for revision sinus surgery. MF sinus implants may play an important role in the management of patients with recurrent polyposis after sinus surgery.