Pneumatization of the Sphenoidal Sinus May Affect Endonasal Cranial Base Reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to verify if the length of the nasoseptal flap is sufficient to cover the tuberculum sellae and planum sphenoidale of sphenoidal sinuses with varied degrees of pneumatization. METHODS: Retrospective study of paranasal sinus computed tomography comparing the potential length of the nasoseptal flap and the length of the nasoseptal flap required for reconstruction of transtuberculum and transplanum approaches in conchal, presellar, sellar, incomplete postsellar, and complete postsellar sphenoidal sinuses. RESULTS: The length of the nasoseptal flap required for reconstruction of transtuberculum and transplanum approaches was directly related to the degree of pneumatization of the sphenoidal sinus. The nasoseptal flap length was adequate to cover the cranial base after transtuberculum approaches of all cases from the conchal, presellar, and sellar groups and the majority of cases from postsellar pneumatization. For transplanum approaches, the nasosseptal flap was sufficient to reconstruct defects in most cases from conchal, pre-sellar, and sellar type sinuses and in 54,9% and 19,2% in incomplete and complete postsellar, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In well pneumatized sphenoidal sinus, the nasoseptal flap may not be sufficient to cover the cranial base after transtuberculum and transplanum approaches.

SPECIAL ARTICLE COVID-19: Safety for the Rhinologist in the Age of COVID-19: Mask Use, Nasal Corticosteroids, Saline Irrigation, and Endoscopic Procedures - Literature Review

Abstract Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has claimed millions of lives. Adequate protection of the professionals involved in patient care is essential in the battle against this disease. However, there is much uncertainty involving safety-relarted topics that are of particular interest to the rhinologist in the context of COVID-19. Objective To evaluate the current evidence regarding three safety-related topics: mask and respirator use, performance of nasal endoscopic procedures, and use of topical nasal and intranasal medications (saline irrigation and nasal corticosteroids). Methods A literature review was performed on the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, with standardized search queries for each of the three topics of interest. Results In total, 13 articles on mask use, 6 articles on the safety of nasal corticosteroids, 6 articles on the safety of nasal endoscopic procedures, and 1 article on nasal irrigation with saline solution were included in the final analysis. Conclusion N95 respirators are essential for the adequate protection of otolaryngologists. If reuse is necessary, physical methods of sterilization must be employed. No evidence was found to contraindicate the use of nasal corticosteroids, whether acute (in the management of sinonasal inflammatory conditions) or continued (in patients who use them chronically). Nasal irrigation with saline solution apparently does not increase the risk in the context of COVID-19. Nasal endoscopic procedures should only be performed after testing the patient for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the surgical team must wear full personal protective equipment to prevent aerosol exposure.

Safety for the Rhinologist in the Age of COVID-19: Mask Use, Nasal Corticosteroids, Saline Irrigation, and Endoscopic Procedures - Literature Review.

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has claimed millions of lives. Adequate protection of the professionals involved in patient care is essential in the battle against this disease. However, there is much uncertainty involving safety-relarted topics that are of particular interest to the rhinologist in the context of COVID-19. Objective To evaluate the current evidence regarding three safety-related topics: mask and respirator use, performance of nasal endoscopic procedures, and use of topical nasal and intranasal medications (saline irrigation and nasal corticosteroids). Methods A literature review was performed on the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, with standardized search queries for each of the three topics of interest. Results In total, 13 articles on mask use, 6 articles on the safety of nasal corticosteroids, 6 articles on the safety of nasal endoscopic procedures, and 1 article on nasal irrigation with saline solution were included in the final analysis. Conclusion N95 respirators are essential for the adequate protection of otolaryngologists. If reuse is necessary, physical methods of sterilization must be employed. No evidence was found to contraindicate the use of nasal corticosteroids, whether acute (in the management of sinonasal inflammatory conditions) or continued (in patients who use them chronically). Nasal irrigation with saline solution apparently does not increase the risk in the context of COVID-19. Nasal endoscopic procedures should only be performed after testing the patient for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the surgical team must wear full personal protective equipment to prevent aerosol exposure.

Anatomical terminology of the internal nose and paranasal sinuses: cross-cultural adaptation to Portuguese / Anatomical terminology of the internal nose and paranasal sinuses: cross-cultural adaptation to Portuguese

Abstract Introduction: Functional endonasal endoscopic surgery is a frequent surgical procedure among otorhinolaryngologists. In 2014, the European Society of Rhinology published the "European Position Paper on the Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses", aiming to unify the terms in the English language. We do not yet have a unified terminology in the Portuguese language. Objective: Transcultural adaptation of the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal cavities of the "European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses" to Portuguese. Methods: A group of rhinologists from diverse parts of Brazil, all experienced in endoscopic endonasal surgery, was invited to participate in the creation of this position paper on the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in the Portuguese language according to the methodology adapted from that previously described by Rudmik and Smith. Results: The results of this document were generated based on the agreement of the majority of the participants according to the most popular suggestions among the rhinologists. A cross-cultural adaptation of the sinonasal anatomical terminology was consolidated. We suggest the terms "inferior turbinate", "nasal septum", "(bone/cartilaginous) part of the nasal septum", "(middle/inferior) nasal meatus", "frontal sinus drainage pathway", "frontal recess" and "uncinate process" be standardized. Conclusion: We have consolidated a Portuguese version of the European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses, which will help in the publication of technical announcements, scientific publications and the teaching of the internal anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in Brazil.

Resumo: Introdução: A cirurgia endoscópica funcional endonasal é um procedimento cirúrgico frequente entre os otorrinolaringologistas. Em 2014, a Sociedade Europeia de Rinologia publicou o "Documento Europeu para Posicionamento sobre a Terminologia Anatômica Interna do Nariz e das Cavidades Paranasais" com o objetivo de unificar os termos na língua inglesa. Ainda não dispomos de uma terminologia unificada na língua portuguesa. Objetivo: Adaptação transcultural dos termos anatômicos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais para o português da "European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses". Método: Um grupo de rinologistas de todo o Brasil, com experiência em cirurgia endoscópica endonasal, foi convidado a participar da elaboração desse posicionamento sobre os termos anatômicos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais para o português conforme metodologia adaptada da previamente descrita por Rudmik e Smith. Resultados: Os resultados desse documento foram gerados a partir da concordância da maioria dos participantes conforme as sugestões mais populares entre os rinologistas. Uma adaptação transcultural da terminologia anatômica nasossinusal foi consolidada. Sugerimos que se busque uniformizar termos como "concha inferior", "septo nasal", "porção (óssea/cartilaginosa) do septo nasal", "meato (médio/ inferior) nasal", "via da drenagem do seio frontal", "recesso frontal" e "processo uncinado". Conclusão: Consolidamos uma versão adaptada em português da "European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses" que auxiliará a publicação de comunicados técnicos, publicações científicas e o ensino dos termos anatômicos internos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais no Brasil.

Anatomical terminology of the internal nose and paranasal sinuses: cross-cultural adaptation to Portuguese.

INTRODUCTION: Functional endonasal endoscopic surgery is a frequent surgical procedure among otorhinolaryngologists. In 2014, the European Society of Rhinology published the "European Position Paper on the Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses", aiming to unify the terms in the English language. We do not yet have a unified terminology in the Portuguese language. OBJECTIVE: Transcultural adaptation of the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal cavities of the "European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses" to Portuguese. METHODS: A group of rhinologists from diverse parts of Brazil, all experienced in endoscopic endonasal surgery, was invited to participate in the creation of this position paper on the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in the Portuguese language according to the methodology adapted from that previously described by Rudmik and Smith. RESULTS: The results of this document were generated based on the agreement of the majority of the participants according to the most popular suggestions among the rhinologists. A cross-cultural adaptation of the sinonasal anatomical terminology was consolidated. We suggest the terms "inferior turbinate", "nasal septum", "(bone/cartilaginous) part of the nasal septum", "(middle/inferior) nasal meatus", "frontal sinus drainage pathway", "frontal recess" and "uncinate process" be standardized. CONCLUSION: We have consolidated a Portuguese version of the European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses, which will help in the publication of technical announcements, scientific publications and the teaching of the internal anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in Brazil.

Are Auditory Steady-State Responses Useful to Evaluate Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss in Children?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Auditory Steady-State Responses (ASSR) at high intensities in pediatric cochlear implant candidates and to compare the results to behavioral tests responses. METHODS: This prospective study evaluated 42 children with suspected severe-to-profound hearing loss, aged from 3 to 72 months. All had absent ABR and OAE responses. ASSR were evoked using binaural single frequency stimuli at 110 dB HL with a 10 dB down-seeking procedure. ASSR and behavioral test results were compared. RESULTS: Forty-two subjects completed both ASSR and behavioral evaluation. Eleven children (26.2%) had bilateral responses. Four (9.5%) showed unilateral responses in at least two frequencies, all confirmed by behavioral results. Overall 61 ASSR responses were obtained, most (37.7%) in 500 Hz. Mean thresholds were between 101.3 and 104.2 dB HL. Among 27 subjects with absent ASSR, fifteen had no behavioral responses. Seven subjects showed behavioral responses with absent ASSR responses. No spurious ASSR responses were observed at 100 or 110 dB HL. CONCLUSION: ASSR is a valuable tool to detect residual hearing. No false-positive ASSR results were observed among 42 children, but in seven cases with absent ASSR, the test underestimated residual hearing as compared to the behavioral responses.

Are auditory steady-state responses a good tool prior to pediatric cochlear implantation?

INTRODUCTION: ASSR allow frequency-specific evaluation in intensities up to 120dB HL and detection of residual hearing in patients with severe-to-profound hearing loss. AIM: to compare ASSR thresholds and behavioral test results in children with suspected severe-to-profound hearing loss. METHODS: Cross sectional study to compare ASSR and behavioral responses (VRA or audiometry) in 63 pediatric cochlear implant candidates (126 ears) aged between 6 and 72 months. We included children with normal otomicroscopy, absent responses to click-ABR and otoaccoustic emissions. We excluded children with inner ear malformations, auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder or who did not complete VRA or achieve EEG noise<30nV during the ASSR test. Air-conduction ASSR stimuli were continuous sinusoidal tones presented at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4kHz starting at 110dB HL. Behavioral thresholds were acquired with warble tones presented at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4kHz in each ear through insert or head phones at maximum presentation level of 120dB HL. RESULTS: Behavioral thresholds were obtained in 36.7% (185/504) of all frequencies in all subjects, 9% in intensities >110dB HL. Among 504 ASSR measurements, 53 thresholds were obtained (10.5%). Overall 89.5% of the tested frequencies did not show any response at 110dB HL. Most responses were at 500Hz. Mean differences between behavioral and ASSR thresholds varied from 0.09 to 8.94dB. Twenty-seven comparisons of behavioral and ASSR thresholds were obtained: 12 at 0.5kHz, 9 at 1kHz, 5 at 2kHz and 1 at 4kHz. Absent responses were observed in both tests in 38.1% at 0.5kHz, 52.4% at 1kHz, 74.6% at 2kHz and 81.0% at 4kHz. Specificity was>90% at 1, 2 and 4kHz. In ears with no behavioral response at 120dB HL all ASSR thresholds were in the profound hearing loss range, 90% of them were ≥110dB HL. CONCLUSION: Among 63 pediatric CI candidates, absent responses to high-intensity ASSR was the major finding (specificity>90%) predicting behavioral thresholds in the profound hearing loss range. These findings can be helpful to confirm the decision for cochlear implantation.

Hearing preservation using topical dexamethasone alone and associated with hyaluronic acid in cochlear implantation.

CONCLUSION: Topical dexamethasone associated with hyaluronic acid in cochlear implant surgery demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the preservation of low-frequency thresholds when compared with topical dexamethasone alone and a control group. Topical dexamethasone alone was not superior in hearing preservation when compared to the control group. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of topical dexamethasone alone and associated with hyaluronic acid intraoperatively in hearing preservation in cochlear implantation. METHODS: Eighteen severely to profoundly hearing-impaired adult patients with measurable hearing were divided into three groups preoperatively: cochlear implantation as a control group (group 1), cochlear implantation using topical dexamethasone intraoperatively (group 2), and cochlear implantation using topical dexamethasone associated with hyaluronic acid intraoperatively (group 3). Preimplant and postimplant low-frequency pure-tone averages (PTAs) were calculated from unaided audiograms at 125, 250, and 500 Hz. RESULTS: The mean changes in the low-frequency PTA comparing postoperative against preoperative thresholds were 28.03 ± 6.77 dB in group 1, 30 ± 14.53 dB in group 2, and 7.23 ± 6.12 dB in group 3. There was statistical difference when comparing group 3 with groups 1 and 2 using one-way ANOVA (p = 0.002) followed by Scheffé post hoc test.

Evaluation of residual hearing in cochlear implants candidates using auditory steady-state response.

CONCLUSION: The correlations between behavioral and auditory steady-state response (ASSR) thresholds were significant at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. ASSR presented high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of residual hearing in cochlear implant candidates when compared with warble-tone audiometry. OBJECTIVES: To assess residual hearing in cochlear implant candidates by comparing the electrophysiological thresholds obtained in dichotic single-frequency ASSR with behavioral thresholds at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. METHODS: This was a comparative study between ASSR and warble-tone audiometry thresholds in 40 cochlear implant candidates (80 ears) before cochlear implantation with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. RESULTS: Thresholds were obtained in 62.5% of all frequencies evaluated in warble-tone audiometry and in 63.1% in the ASSR. ASSR sensitivity was 96% and specificity was 91.6%. Mean differences between behavioral and ASSR thresholds did not reach significance at any frequencies. Strong correlations between behavioral and ASSR thresholds were observed in 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz and moderate in 4000 Hz, with correlation coefficients varying from 0.65 to 0.81. On 90% of occasions, ASSR thresholds were acquired within 10 dB of behavioral thresholds.

Comparative study between pure tone audiometry and auditory steady-state responses in normal hearing subjects.

INTRODUCTION: Auditory steady-state responses (ASSR) are an important tool to detect objectively frequency-specific hearing thresholds. Pure-tone audiometry is the gold-standard for hearing evaluation, although sometimes it may be inconclusive, especially in children and uncooperative adults. AIM: Compare pure tone thresholds (PT) with ASSR thresholds in normal hearing subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective cross-sectional study we included 26 adults (n = 52 ears) of both genders, without any hearing complaints or otologic diseases and normal puretone thresholds. All subjects had clinical history, otomicroscopy, audiometry and immitance measurements. This evaluation was followed by the ASSR test. The mean pure-tone and ASSR thresholds for each frequency were calculated. RESULTS: The mean difference between PTand ASSR thresholdswas 7,12 for 500 Hz, 7,6 for 1000 Hz, 8,27 for 2000 Hz and 9,71 dB for 4000 Hz. There were no difference between PT and ASSR means at either frequency. CONCLUSION: ASSR thresholds were comparable to pure-tone thresholds in normal hearing adults. Nevertheless it should not be used as the only method of hearing evaluation.

Estudo comparativo entre audiometria tonal limiar e resposta auditiva de estado estavel em normouvintes / Comparative study between pure tone audiometry and auditory steady-state responses in normal hearing subjects

Introdução: As respostas auditivas de estado estável permitem avaliar de forma objetiva limiares auditivos frequência-específica. A audiometria tonal é o exame padrão-ouro; no entanto, nem sempre pode ser conclusiva, principalmente em crianças e adultos não colaborativos. Objetivo: Comparar os limiares auditivos da RAEE aos da audiometria tonal em indivíduos com audição normal. Materiais e métodos: Foram incluídos neste estudo prospectivo de corte transversal 26 adultos (52 orelhas), de ambos os gêneros, com audiometria normal e sem queixas otológicas. Os pacientes foram submetidos a anamnese, otomicroscopia, audiometria e imitanciometria. A seguir, realizou-se avaliação de respostas auditivas de estado estável. Os resultados obtidos foram analisados estatisticamente e comparados entre si. Resultados: A diferença entre os limiares (em dB NA) obtidos em ambos os exames para cada frequência testada foi de 7,12 dB para 500 Hz; 7,6 dB para 1000 Hz; 8,27 dB para 2000 Hz e 9,71 dB para 4000 Hz, com limiares mais elevados na RAEE, em todas as frequências. Não houve diferença estatística entre as médias para cada frequência testada. Conclusão: Os limiares obtidos na RAEE foram comparáveis aos da audiometria tonal em indivíduos normouvintes; entretanto, não deve ser usado como único método de avaliação auditiva. .

Introduction: Auditory steady-state responses (ASSR) are an important tool to detect objectively frequency-specific hearing thresholds. Pure-tone audiometry is the gold-standard for hearing evaluation, although sometimes it may be inconclusive, especially in children and uncooperative adults. Aim: Compare pure tone thresholds (PT) with ASSR thresholds in normal hearing subjects. Materials and methods: In this prospective cross-sectional study we included 26 adults (n = 52 ears) of both genders, without any hearing complaints or otologic diseases and normal puretone thresholds. All subjects had clinical history, otomicroscopy, audiometry and immitance measurements. This evaluation was followed by the ASSR test. The mean pure-tone and ASSR thresholds for each frequency were calculated. Results: The mean difference between PTand ASSR thresholdswas 7,12 for 500 Hz, 7,6 for 1000 Hz, 8,27 for 2000 Hz and 9,71 dB for 4000 Hz. There were no difference between PT and ASSR means at either frequency. Conclusion: ASSR thresholds were comparable to pure-tone thresholds in normal hearing adults. Nevertheless it should not be used as the only method of hearing evaluation. .