Is Nasal Endoscopy of Diagnostic Value in Chronic Rhinosinusitis Without Nasal Polyps?

Endoscopic examination of the nasal cavity is an integral part of the assessment of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. However, the benefit gained by performing endoscopy with respect to the patient's medical condition has not been completely assessed. We conducted a prospective cohort in an academic medical center. Thirty-nine patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis, without polyps, whose ailment was managed conservatively with no surgical intervention. All patients underwent nasal endoscopy, a computed tomography (CT) scan rated for Lund-MacKay score, and completed a sino nasal outcome test (SNOT)-20 questionnaire. This same evaluation was repeated 6 weeks following medical treatment. The CT scan and SNOT-20 questionnaire were independent parameters to evaluate the endoscopy score in each nasal passage. Thirty-nine (28 females) patients completed the follow-up period. A total of 156 endoscopic evaluations were performed, in which 74 nasal cavities were found to have significant pathology and 82 were either normal or displayed mild pathology. The correlation with the Lund-MacKay score was poor with a positive predictive value of 68.9% (31.1% false positive and 28% false negative). However, while looking at the SNOT-20 score, corrected for repeated measures, a higher endoscopy score was associated with a higher SNOT-20 score (odds ratio = 3.53, 95% confidence interval = 1.54-8.09, P = .003). Patients with higher endoscopy scores had a greater probability for exhibiting severe symptoms. However, we could not demonstrate a strong correlation between nasal endoscopy findings and CT scan scores. Therefore, with respect to patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps, nasal endoscopy could be utilized as a beneficial objective tool.

Adenoid Obstruction Assessment in Children: Clinical Evaluation Versus Endoscopy and Radiography.

BACKGROUND: Hypertrophy of the adenoids is common in children. However, the anatomical site makes the adenoids difficult to assess, and studies evaluating the subject are ambiguous, especially with regard to the use of X-ray as an evaluation tool. OBJECTIVES: To compare medical history with clinical, radiological, and endoscopic evaluations of the adenoids and compare obstructed and non-obstructed children relative to the assessment methods. METHODS: A prospective comparative study was conducted with children who were suspected of having enlarged adenoids. All parents completed a medical history questionnaire and patients underwent clinical evaluation based on Nasal Obstruction Index (NOI) scores, radiological assessment based on the lateral neck X-ray adenoid-nasopharynx (A/N( ratio, and endoscopic evaluation based on anatomical relations. Spearman correlations were used for comparison between methods. RESULTS: We evaluated 36 patients, median age 5.33 years. Correlation measurements for clinical assessment and questionnaire (r = 0.582, P < 0.0001), questionnaire and endoscopy (r = 0.462, P = 0.005), and clinical assessment and nasal endoscopy (r = 0.621, P < 0.0001) were statistically significant. None of the parameters correlated with the radiological findings. A statistically significant difference was found between the obstructed and non-obstructed groups in both questionnaire (P = 0.004) and clinical assessment (P < 0.0001). However, no difference was found in X-ray measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral neck X-ray measurements were not correlated to symptoms, signs, or endoscopic findings. Therefore, medical professionals should use lateral neck radiography when considering adenoidectomy only on a highly selective basis.