Higher Prevalence and Severity of Eosinophilic Otitis Media in Patients with Asthma-COPD Overlap Compared with Asthma Alone.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic otitis media (EOM) is well-known to frequently co-exist with adult-onset asthma. Both diseases are similar type 2 inflammation and are considered to have a "one airway, one disease" relationship. Asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap (ACO), characterized by airway obstruction caused by airway wall thickening (AWT), is a severe condition with a higher incidence of mortality compared to asthma alone or COPD alone. Based on the "one airway, one disease" concept, we hypothesized that the inflammatory pathophysiology of EOM differs depending on its comorbidity with ACO or with asthma alone. METHODS: A total of 77 chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients with asthma were enrolled in this study. The subjects were divided into 2 groups: a group with comorbid asthma alone (asthma group; 46 patients), and a group with comorbid ACO (ACO group; 31 patients). The 2 groups were compared and assessed with regard to various factors, including the patients' clinical characteristics, prevalence rate of EOM, EOM severity, EOMs relationships with smoking and AWT, and the eosinophil and neutrophil cell counts in the middle ear effusion (MEE). RESULTS: The ACO group included significantly more males (p < 0.05), was significantly older (p < 0.05), and showed significantly lower lung function values (FEV1 [L], FEV1 [%pred]) (p < 0.01) compared with the asthma group. The ACO group also had a significant history of smoking as shown by the Brinkman index (p < 0.01) and greater AWT as assessed by high-resolution computed tomography (p < 0.05). The EOM prevalence rate was significantly higher in the ACO group (p < 0.05), especially with increased ACO severity (p < 0.05). The EOM severity was also significantly higher in the ACO group (p < 0.05) and also correlated with the ACO severity (p < 0.05). The pretreatment ear clinical characteristics score and the average air conduction hearing level were significantly higher in the ACO group (p < 0.05). The eosinophil percentage in the MEE/otorrhea was significantly lower in the ACO group (25.3%) than in the asthma group (54.7%) (p < 0.05). Conversely, the neutrophil percentage was significantly higher in the ACO group (75.7% vs. 41.9%) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, in CRS patients with asthma, comorbidity with ACO may be a clinical factor leading to increased EOM prevalence and severity, as well as a higher neutrophil infiltration percentage in the middle ear. Cessation of smoking and early therapeutic intervention for ACO may mitigate progression of bronchial remodeling (i.e., reduce AWT) and help reduce the prevalence and severity of EOM.

Pretreatment monocyte counts and neutrophil counts predict the risk for febrile neutropenia in patients undergoing TPF chemotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is the most serious hematologic toxicity of systemic chemotherapy. However, accurate prediction of FN development has been difficult because the risk varies largely depending on the chemotherapy regimen and various individual factors. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed diverse clinical factors including pretreatment hematological parameters to clarify the reliable predictors of FN development during chemotherapy with a docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (TPF) regimen in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. RESULTS: Among the 50 patients, grade ≥3 neutropenia, grade 4 neutropenia, and FN developed in 36 (72%), 21 (42%), and 12 (24%) patients, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that a pretreatment absolute monocyte count (AMC) <370/mm3 is an independent predictor of TPF chemotherapy-induced FN (odds ratio=6.000, p=0.017). The predictive performance of the model combining AMC and absolute neutrophil count (ANC), in which the high-risk group was defined as having an AMC <370/mm3 and/or ANC <3500/mm3, was superior (area under the curve [AUC]=0.745) to that of the model with a cutoff for AMC alone (AUC=0.679). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of our results, we recommend primary prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and/or antibiotics selectively for patients predicted to be at high risk for TPF chemotherapy-induced FN.

Treatment outcomes of sialendoscopy for submandibular gland sialolithiasis: The minor axis of the sialolith is a regulative factor for the removal of sialoliths in the hilum of the submandibular gland using sialendoscopy alone.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the general guidelines for the removal of sialoliths for submandibular gland sialolithiasis using sialendoscopy alone. METHODS: We analyzed 61 sialoliths treated using sialendoscopy in 42 patients with submandibular gland sialolithiasis. We evaluated the submandibular gland sialoliths and divided each case based upon the location: the Wharton's duct or the hilum. We measured the major and minor axes of the sialoliths using a soft tissue computed-tomography (CT) scan and evaluated the removal rate of the sialoliths using sialendoscopy alone. RESULTS: The removal rate of the sialoliths in the Wharton's duct (52.6%) was significantly higher than that in the hilum of the submandibular gland (26.1%) (P=0.042). The minor axis was significantly correlated to the treatment outcome of sialendoscopy alone for all cases (P=0.030). A significant correlation was observed for cases involving the hilum of the submandibular gland and the measurement of the minor axes of the sialoliths for the treatment outcome of sialendoscopy alone (P=0.009). The major axis showed no correlation with the treatment outcomes of sialendoscopy alone. CONCLUSION: The measurement of the minor axes of the sialoliths with a soft tissue CT scan was correlated with treatment outcome of sialendoscopy alone for all cases, particularly sialoliths in the hilum. The easurement of the major axis showed no correlation with outcomes of sialendoscopy alone.

Diagnostic and treatment effects of sialendoscopy for patients with swelling of the parotid gland when sialoliths are undetected with computed tomography.

Between August 2009 and May 2016, 74 patients underwent sialoendoscopic surgery. 32 patients had parotid gland disease and 9 patients had intermittent swelling of the parotid gland and sialoliths were not detected with CT imaging. 4 patients were diagnosed with idiopathic Stensen's duct stenosis. Sialendoscopy directly confirmed Stensen's duct stenosis in 2 patients. However, the sialendoscope was unable to be inserted in the other 2 patients, who had stenosis of the orifice of the Stensen's duct. Balloon expansion of the duct was performed in these 2 patients and a steroid drug was injected into the duct in one patient. Complete remission was archived in one patient treated with sialendoscopy. Three patients had sialolithiasis. Microsialoliths and/or white floating matter was observed and removed using sialendoscopy. All patients experienced complete remission. In cases of Sjögren syndrome and recurrent parotitis, sialendoscopic surgery was performed, but the symptoms showed no improvement. For patients with microsialoliths, sialendoscopy may be most useful for diagnosis and treatment when the sialoliths are not detected with CT imaging. At present, sialendoscopic surgery have limitation in the treatment of Stensen's duct stenosis and may similarly have limitation in the treatment of Sjögren's syndrome and recurrent parotitis.

The landmark for removal of sialoliths using sialendoscopy alone in parotid gland sialolithiasis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the general guidelines for removal of sialoliths in parotid gland sialolithiasis using sialendoscopy alone. METHODS: We analyzed 34 sialoliths treated using sialendoscopy in 26 patients with parotid gland sialolithiasis. We divided the Stensen's duct and parotid gland into for parts using computed tomography findings: (A) front of the masseter, (B) anterior and lateral to the center (anterolateral) of the masseter, (C) posterior and lateral to the center (posterolateral) of the masseter, (D) behind of the masseter. The location and size of each sialolith was assessed. RESULTS: The removal rates of sialoliths in the different locations by sialendoscopy alone were as follows: front of the masseter, 68.8%; anterolateral of the masseter, 60.0%; posterolateral of the masseter, 0%; and behind of the masseter, 33.3%. The removal rate using sialendoscopy alone was significantly higher in the sections anterior to the center of the masseter than in those posterior to the center of the masseter (66.7% [14/21] vs. 20.0% [2/10]; P=0.019). The size of the sialolith was not correlated to the removal rate by sialendoscopy alone. CONCLUSION: Sialoliths of the parotid gland located in positions anterior to the center of the masseter are significantly easier to remove by sialendoscopy alone. The center of the masseter is a general landmark for removal of sialoliths from the parotid gland using sialendoscopy alone. The size of the sialolith is not correlated with removal, except rare huge sialoliths.