Predictors of Sinonasal Improvement After Highly Effective Modulator Therapy in Adults with Cystic Fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: The 22-question SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) assesses chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) severity. We aimed to identify predictors of SNOT-22 score improvement following highly effective modulator therapy (HEMT) initiation and to corroborate the SNOT-22 minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: Prospective observational data was pooled from four studies across 10 US centers investigating people with CF (PwCF) and CRS. Three studies evaluated HEMT's impact on CRS. For participants enrolled prior to HEMT initiation, SNOT-22 scores were obtained at baseline and after 3-6 months of HEMT. Multivariate regression identified predictors of improvement. Cronbach's alpha and four distribution-based methods were used to assess internal consistency and calculate the MCID of the SNOT-22. RESULTS: A total of 184 PwCF participated with mean baseline SNOT-22 scores ranging from 18.1 to 56.7. Cronbach's alpha was ≥0.90 across sites. Participants at sites with pre- and post-HEMT data reported improvement in SNOT-22 scores after initiating HEMT (all p < 0.05). Worse baseline SNOT-22 score (odds ratio (OR): 1.05, p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.02-1.08), F508del homozygosity (OR: 4.30, p = 0.040, 95% CI: 1.14-18.99), and absence of prior modulator therapy (OR: 4.99, p = 0.017, 95% CI: 1.39-20.11) were associated with greater SNOT-22 improvement. The mean MCID calculated via distribution-based methods was 8.5. CONCLUSION: Worse baseline sinonasal symptoms, F508del homozygosity, and absence of prior modulator therapy predicted greater improvement after HEMT initiation. The mean MCID for SNOT-22 in PwCF is 8.5 points, similar to non-CF individuals with CRS, and provides a threshold specifically for PwCF. The SNOT-22 has strong internal consistency in PwCF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 2024.

Quantification of Budesonide Retained in the Sinonasal Cavity After High-Volume Saline Irrigation in Post-Operative Chronic Rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Budesonide high-volume saline irrigations (HVSIs) are routinely used to treat chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) due to improved sinonasal delivery and efficacy compared to intranasal corticosteroid sprays. The off-label use of budesonide is assumed to be safe, with several studies suggesting the systemically absorbed dose of budesonide HVSI is low. However, the actual budesonide dose retained in the sinonasal cavity following HVSI is unknown. The objective of this study was to quantify the retained dose of budesonide after HVSI. METHODS: Adult patients diagnosed with CRS who had undergone endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and were prescribed budesonide HVSI were enrolled into a prospective, observational cohort study. Patients performed budesonide HVSI (0.5 mg dose) under supervision in an outpatient clinic, and irrigation effluent was collected. High-performance liquid chromatography was employed to determine the dose of budesonide retained after HVSI. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients met inclusion criteria. The average corrected retained dose of budesonide across the cohort was 0.171 ± 0.087 mg (37.9% of administered budesonide). Increased time from ESS significantly impacted the measured retained dose, with those 3 months post-ESS retaining 27.4% of administered budesonide (P = .0004). CONCLUSION: The retained dose of budesonide in patients with CRS after HVSI was found to be significantly higher than previously estimated and decreased with time post-ESS. Given that budesonide HVSI is a cornerstone of care in CRS, defining the retained dose and the potential systemic implications is critical to understanding the safety of budesonide HVSI.

Patient perspectives on chronic rhinosinusitis in cystic fibrosis: Symptom prioritization in the era of highly effective modulator therapy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is common in people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). Rhinologic symptom prioritization and areas that influence CRS treatment choices, including pursuing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), remain understudied. METHODS: Adult PwCF + CRS were enrolled at eight centers into a prospective, observational study (2019-2023). Participants were administered the 22-SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) survey and a modified SNOT-22 instrument examining symptom importance. We determined importance rankings for individual symptoms and SNOT-22 symptom importance subdomains in two sets of subgroups-those pursuing ESS versus continuing medical management (CMT), and those on elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) versus not on ETI. RESULTS: Among 69 participants, the highest priorities were nasal congestion (n = 48, 69.6% important), post-nasal discharge (32, 46.4%), facial pain (29, 43.3%), waking up tired (27, 39.1%), and fatigue (26, 37.7%). Those electing surgery (n = 23) prioritized sleep and psychological dysfunction symptoms compared to those pursuing CMT (n = 49) (sleep median score = 19.0 [interquartile range: 12.0, 25.0] vs. 4.5 [0.0, 12.8]; p < 0.0001; psychological = 17.0 [7.0, 26.0] vs. 7.0 [0.0, 15.8]; p = 0.002). ETI users had comparable SNOT-22 total symptom importance scores to non-ETI users (p = 0.14). Non-ETI users (n = 34) showed a trend toward prioritizing sleep symptoms compared to ETI users (n = 35) (13.0 [2.8, 22.3] vs. 6.0 [2.0, 17.0]; p = 0.055). CONCLUSIONS: Nasal congestion and post-nasal discharge were top priorities reported by PwCF + CRS. Those electing surgery prioritized sleep and psychological symptoms, highlighting their importance in pre-operative discussions. Non-ETI users' prioritization of sleep improvement may highlight their unique disease impact and therapeutic needs; however, additional investigation is required.

Factors that predict pursuing sinus surgery in the era of highly effective modulator therapy.

BACKGROUND: Comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) remains unresolved for many people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). While highly effective modulator therapy improves quality-of-life and symptom severity, the impact of this intervention and other factors associated with pursuing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) remains understudied. METHODS: Adult PwCF + CRS were enrolled into a prospective, observational, multi-institutional study. Participants completed validated outcome measures to evaluate respiratory symptom severity, depression, headache, and sleep quality, as well as nasal endoscopy, sinus computed tomography (CT), and olfactory testing. Bivariate comparisons and regression modeling evaluated treatment cofactors, disease characteristics, and outcome measures associated with pursuing ESS. RESULTS: Sixty PwCF were analyzed, including 24 (40%) who elected ESS. Pursuing ESS was associated with worse SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) total, rhinologic, psychological, and sleep dysfunction domain scores; worse Patient Health Questionnaire-9-Revised depression scores; worse Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index total scores; worse weight, role, emotion, and eating domain scores on the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised; more severe disease on nasal endoscopy; and lack of modulator therapy (all p < 0.050). Multivariable regression identified that worse SNOT-22 total score was associated with electing ESS (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.16, p = 0.015) and elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) treatment (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.004-0.34, p = 0.004) was associated with pursing medical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Worse sinonasal symptom burden, lack of ETI treatment, sleep quality, depression, and nasal endoscopy scores were associated with electing ESS, while lung disease severity and sinus CT scores were not. ETI use was associated with lower odds of pursuing ESS independent of sinonasal symptom burden.

Determining the minimal clinically important difference for the questionnaire of olfactory disorders in people with cystic fibrosis and factors associated with improvement after highly effective modulator therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is common among people with cystic fibrosis (PwCF). The Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders (QOD) is a validated instrument that evaluates olfactory-specific quality-of-life. The QOD minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and factors associated with olfactory improvement after elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor have not been determined for PwCF. METHODS: Prospective observational data were pooled from three studies that enrolled adult PwCF with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). QOD scores and disease characteristics were assessed. To evaluate internal consistency and calculate the QOD MCID, Cronbach's alpha and four distribution-based methods were employed. For participants who enrolled prior to elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor, QOD scores were obtained at baseline and after elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor initiation. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors associated with QOD improvement. RESULTS: Of 129 PwCF included, 65 had QOD scores before and 3-6 months after starting elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor. Mean baseline QOD score was 6.5 ± 7.9. Mean Cronbach's alpha was ≥0.85. The MCID estimates were as follows: Cohen's effect size = 1.6, standard error of measurement = 2.5, ½ baseline standard deviation = 4.0, and minimal detectable change = 6.9. Mean MCID was 3.7. Of those with pre/post elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor QOD scores, the mean change in QOD was -1.3 ± 5.4. After elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor, QOD improvement surpassed the MCID in 22% of participants (14/65). Worse baseline QOD scores and nasal polyps were associated with improved QOD scores after elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (both p < 0.04). CONCLUSION: The QOD MCID in PwCF was estimated to be 3.7. Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor led to qualitative but not clinically meaningful improvements in QOD score for most PwCF; PwCF with worse baseline QOD scores and nasal polyps improved in a clinically significant manner.

An eosinophil peroxidase activity assay accurately predicts eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: A definitive diagnosis of eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (eCRS) requires invasive surgical tissue sampling and histologic enumeration of intact eosinophils. Eosinophil peroxidase (EPX) is an accurate biomarker of sinonasal tissue eosinophilia in CRS regardless of polyp status. A less invasive and rapid method that accurately identifies tissue eosinophilia would be of great benefit to patients. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate a new clinical tool that uses a nasal swab and colorimetric EPX activity assay to predict a diagnosis of eCRS. METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study was conducted using nasal swabs and sinonasal tissue biopsies obtained from patients with CRS electing endoscopic sinus surgery. Patients were classified as non-eCRS (n = 19) and eCRS (n = 35) on the basis of pathologically determined eosinophil counts of less than 10 or greater than or equal to 10 eosinophils/HPF, respectively. Swab-deposited EPX activity was measured and compared with tissue eosinophil counts, EPX levels, and CRS-specific disease metrics. RESULTS: EPX activity was significantly increased in patients with eCRS than in patients without eCRS (P < .0001). With a relative absorbance unit cutoff value of greater than or equal to 0.80, the assay demonstrated high sensitivity (85.7%) and moderate specificity (79.0%) for confirming eCRS. Spearman correlations between EPX activity and tissue eosinophil counts (rs = 0.424), EPX levels (rs = 0.503), and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores (rs = 0.440) in eCRS were significant (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This investigation evaluates a nasal swab sampling method and EPX activity assay that accurately confirms eCRS. This method could potentially address the unmet need to identify sinonasal tissue eosinophilia at the point-of-care, as well as to longitudinally monitor eosinophil activity and treatment response.

Cystic Fibrosis Increases Long-Term Revision Rates of Endoscopic Sinus Surgery in Patients With Comorbid Chronic Rhinosinusitis.

Background: Comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) of adulthood is increasing among patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) due to improved median survival. However, little is known about the natural history of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in this cohort. The objective of this study was to evaluate the revision rate of ESS and associated risk factors among adults with CRS and CF (CRSwCF). Methods: The Utah Population Database was queried for patients age >18 with CRS who underwent at least one ESS between 1996 and 2018. Demographic information and ESS history were collected and compared for CRSwCF versus CRS without CF (CRSsCF) using chi-square and t-tests. Risk factors for revision were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models and logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 34 050 patients (33 639 CRSsCF and 411 CRSwCF) were included in the final analysis. The mean duration of follow-up was 9.3 and 9.3 years, respectively (P = .98). Adult patients with CF were significantly more likely to undergo revision ESS (18.7%) than those without CF (13.4%; P < .01). Logistic regression analysis indicated that a diagnosis of CF independently elevated the risk for revision ESS in the absence of nasal polyps (odds ratio [OR] 2.18, confidence interval [CI] 1.34-3.54), asthma (OR 1.36, CI 0.94-1.98), and allergies (OR 1.29, CI 0.90-1.73). Conclusion: In the era before highly effective modulator therapies, the mean revision rate of ESS among adults with CRSwCF was 18.7%, significantly greater than that of adults with CRSsCF. CF was an independent risk factor for revision ESS in the absence of nasal polyps, asthma, and allergies.

Virtual Care in Rhinology.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) pandemic has resulted in an increase in virtual care. While some specialties are well suited to virtual care, Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery could be limited due to reliance on physical examination and nasal endoscopy, including Rhinology. It is likely virtual care will remain integrated for the foreseeable future and it is important to determine the strengths and weaknesses of this treatment modality for rhinology. METHODS: A survey on virtual care in rhinology was distributed to 61 Canadian rhinologists. The primary objective was to determine how virtual care compared to in-person care in each area of a typical appointment. Other areas focused on platforms used to deliver virtual care and which patients could be appropriately assessed by virtual visits. RESULTS: 43 participants responded (response rate 70.5%). The majority of participants use the telephone as their primary platform. History taking and reviewing results (lab work, imaging) were reported to be equivalent in virtual care. Non-urgent follow up and new patients were thought to be the most appropriate for virtual care. The inability to perform exams and nasal endoscopy were reported to be significant limitations. CONCLUSION: It is important to understand the strengths and limitations of virtual care. These results identify the perceived strengths and weaknesses of virtual care in rhinology, and will help rhinologists understand the role of virtual care in their practices.

Asthma increases long-term revision rates of endoscopic sinus surgery in chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyposis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with asthma (CRS-A) has a significant impact on patient morbidity and quality of life. Nevertheless, little is known about the natural history of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in this cohort. The objective of this study was to evaluate revision rates of ESS in CRS-A and identify risk factors associated with increased likelihood for revision surgery compared to those with CRS without asthma (CRS-alone). METHODS: The Utah Population Database was queried for patients age >18 years with CRS who underwent at least 1 ESS between 1996 and 2018. Demographic information and history of ESS were collected and compared between CRS-A and CRS-alone using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t tests for continuous variables. Risk factors for revision surgery were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: A total of 33,090 patients (7693 CRS-A and 25,397 CRS-alone) were included in the final analysis. Mean follow up was 9.8 years in CRS-A and 9.1 years in CRS-alone (p < 0.001). The revision rate among patients with CRS-A (21.5%) was twice that of CRS-alone (10.8%) (p < 0.001). Among patients with CRS, a history of allergy (p < 0.001), asthma (p < 0.001), and nasal polyposis (p < 0.001) was independently associated with increased risk of revision ESS. Patients with CRS-A and nasal polyposis were 6 times more likely to require revision surgery than those with CRS-alone (p < 0.010). CONCLUSION: The rate of revision ESS in CRS-A was twice that of CRS-alone; patients with CRS-A and nasal polyposis were 6 times more likely to require revision than those with CRS-alone. ©2021 ARSAAOA, LLC.

The value of endoscopic sinus surgery in chronic rhinosinusitis.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a disease with significant impacts at both a societal and personal level. There has been an increase in emphasis on patient-centered care and patient outcomes, with value becoming a commonplace concept in health care systems. This review seeks to better define the value that endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) provides in the treatment of CRS. DATA SOURCES: PubMed literature review. REVIEW METHODS: A review of published literature related to ESS and its effects on CRS patients from multiple perspectives (quality outcomes, patient satisfaction, cost-effectiveness) was integrated and analyzed through the viewpoint of a value equation. RESULTS: ESS provides long-term quality outcomes in both patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as well as in objective metrics for patients refractory to medical therapy. The vast majority undergoing ESS are satisfied both in the short and long-term with their decision to pursue surgery. Treatment of CRS with ESS is generally more cost-effective than continued medical therapy (CMT), especially in refractory patients. Taken together, the combination of improved outcomes as well as patient satisfaction after ESS in relation to the costs of surgery provides significant quantifiable value to CRS patients. CONCLUSION: ESS clearly provides value in the treatment of CRS. Understanding both quality and outcome metrics along with patient expectations and priorities will assist providers in generating a more personalized and value-based approach to patients with CRS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

CSO (Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery) position paper on rhinologic and skull base surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Healthcare services in many countries have been partially or completely disrupted by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic since its onset in the end of 2019. Amongst the most impacted are the elective medical and surgical services in order to conserve resources to care for COVID-19 patients. As the number of infected patients decrease across Canada, elective surgeries are being restarted in a staged manner. Since Otolaryngologists - Head & Neck Surgeons manage surgical diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract where the highest viral load reside, it is imperative that these surgeries resume in a safe manner. The aim of this document is to compile the current best evidence available and provide expert consensus on the safe restart of rhinologic and skull base surgeries while discussing the pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative care and tips. Risk assessment, patient selection, case triage, and pre-operative COVID-19 testing will be analyzed and discussed. These guidelines will also consider the optimal use of personal protective equipment for specific cases, general and specific operative room precautions, and practical tips of intra-operative maneuvers to optimize patient and provider safety. Given that the literature surrounding COVID-19 is rapidly evolving, these recommendations will serve to start our specialty back into elective rhinologic surgeries over the next months and they may change as we learn more about this disease.

Drug-eluting implants in chronic rhinosinusitis: an evidence-based review with recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting implants are becoming increasingly popular in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). A previous attempt to make an evidence-based recommendation was hindered by limited evidence and experience with these implants. Since that time, the body of literature discussing drug-eluting implants has grown rapidly. The objective of this study was to review drug-eluting implants designed for use in the sinonasal cavity through an evidence-based review with recommendations. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Review, and gray literature databases from January 1990 through February 2019 to examine drug-eluting implants used in CRS. Benefit-harm assessments, value judgments, and recommendations were made based on the available evidence. Study exclusion criteria included studies unavailable in English and non-endoscopic sinus surgeries. All authors agreed on recommendations through an iterative process. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were included in the final analysis. Absorbable drug-eluting implants achieved a high aggregate grade of evidence (A), with a recommendation for their use to be considered in carefully selected patients. Nonabsorbable drug-eluting implants were recommended against due to minimal evidence supporting clinical efficacy. Antibiotic and alternative drug-eluting implants lack sufficient evidence for recommendations. CONCLUSION: Absorbable steroid-eluting implants are recommended for carefully selected patients with CRS. Additional research to define appropriate patient selection is needed.

The relationship of chronic rhinosinusitis and depression.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this article is to identify and describe the relationship between chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and comorbid depression, including the patient factors that may increase the risk of depression. The impact of comorbid depression on quality of life, response to treatment and healthcare utilization will also be assessed. RECENT FINDINGS: CRS is associated with a significantly increased prevalence of depression, where 9-26% of patients with CRS will have physician-diagnosed depression. An additional 40% will have undiagnosed depression that can be identified through screening tools. Patients without polyps are more likely to experience comorbid depression, as are patients with significant sleep dysfunction, olfactory dysfunction, and pain. CRS symptoms do improve with medical and surgical therapy in depressed patients, though baseline and posttreatment scores are worse. A similar degree of benefit from therapy is seen in both depressed and nondepressed patients. CRS treatment does seem to improve depression, whereas the effect of depression specific therapy is unknown. Depressed patients have a significantly larger economic burden because of their increased healthcare utilization and productivity losses. SUMMARY: Depression is a highly prevalent and impactful comorbidity in patients with CRS. Increased awareness of this relationship may improve patients' overall quality of care.

Socioeconomic status impacts postoperative productivity loss and health utility changes in refractory chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health can have a substantial impact on treatment outcomes. Prior study has shown that socioeconomic status influences the likelihood of improvement in quality-of-life (QOL) following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). However, the impact of socioeconomic factors on changes in productivity loss and health utility after ESS remains unknown. METHODS: Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) who underwent ESS were prospectively enrolled into a multi-institutional cohort study. Productivity losses were calculated using the human capital approach and monetized using U.S. government-estimated wage rates. Health utility values (HUVs) were derived from the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form-12 survey using University of Sheffield algorithms. Independent socioeconomic factors of interest included: age, gender, ethnicity, insurance status, educational attainment, and household income categorized via the Thompson-Hickey model. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients met inclusion criteria, and 163 (71%) provided postoperative follow-up. All subjects reported significant, within-subject improvement in both mean monetized productivity loss (p < 0.001) and HUV postoperatively (p < 0.001). Using paired sample statistics, patients with lowest income (≤$25,000/year) and with Medicare insurance did not report significant improvement in productivity loss (p ≥ 0.112) or HUV (p ≥ 0.081), although sample size limitations may have contributed to this finding. Patients in higher income tiers ($25,001 to $100,000/year and $100,001+/year) and those with employer-provided/private health insurance reported significant postoperative improvements in productivity loss and HUV (all p ≤ 0.003). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic factors, including income and insurance provision, may impact improvements in productivity loss and HUV following ESS. Further research to validate these findings, ascertain mechanisms behind these results, and improve these outcomes is warranted.

An analysis of RUC methodology for determining the RVU valuation of sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Relative Value Scale Update Committee, commonly known as the RUC, is responsible for defining the value of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The RUC process uses survey responses reporting operative times to determine procedure reimbursement, but it is limited by low response rates, small sample sizes, and unclear generalizability of the results. By comparing actual reported intraoperative times to the times determined by the RUC process, in this study we sought to assess the performance of RUC methodology in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). METHODS: The ESS CPT codes that were reassessed in 2016 using the RUC method were examined in this study. Intraoperative time data for these codes were retrospectively collected from 14 medical facilities, using time stamps in the electronic health record. These actual intraoperative times were compared with the 2016 RUC survey results. RESULTS: There were 143 RUC physician survey responses and 446 actual procedure times included in the final analysis. There was significant variability within the RUC survey responses (ie, unilateral anterior ethmoidectomy times varied from 5 to 90 minutes). There was also a significant difference between the RUC survey results and actual intraoperative times (p < 0.001). For example, frontal sinus surgeries showed a particularly poor correlation between actual and RUC times. CONCLUSION: The RUC process may not accurately estimate or value actual intraoperative times. Real-world intraoperative times are readily accessible and may be an alternative to survey-based methodology in the future.

Operative time and cost variability for functional endoscopic sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the variation in costs of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is critical to defining value. Current published costs of ESS have not identified potential sources of variation. Our objective was to analyze ESS costs to identify sources of variance that could guide value-improving decisions. METHODS: ESS cases (n = 1739) performed between 2008 and 2016 were identified from a database of 22 rural to tertiary facilities. Cost and time data were extracted from the database. Medical records were reviewed to confirm procedures. Three bilateral groupings were examined (n = 895 cases from 13 facilities): (1) full ESS (all sinuses); (2) intermediate ESS (total ethmoid, maxillary); and (3) anterior ESS (anterior ethmoid, maxillary). Cost and operative time were analyzed using multivariable gamma regression. RESULTS: Median costs for full, intermediate, and anterior ESS were $4281, $3716, and $2549 U.S. dollars (p < 0.001). Median durations were 87, 60, and 58 minutes (p < 0.001). Among patients with no additional procedures, those with full ESS had operative duration, total cost, and supply costs that were 1.37 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17 to 1.61), 1.52 (95% CI, 1.32 to 1.75), and 2.40 (95% CI, 1.76 to 3.25) times greater than anterior ESS, respectively (all p < 0.001). Intermediate ESS duration at community urban facilities was 1.87 (95% CI, 1.74 to 2.02) times that of community rural facilities (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Duration of surgery, extent of surgery, and location of surgery are sources of significant variation in the cost of ESS. These findings will assist healthcare policy makers, hospitals, and surgeons in optimizing the value of ESS.

Long-term revision rates for endoscopic sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND: Reported revision rates for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) vary significantly. Several investigations examining revision rates for ESS have been limited by duration of follow-up, academic centers, or small surgeon cohorts. The objective of this study was to define the long-term revision rates for ESS and to determine those unique patient factors that increase the risk of revision ESS. METHODS: The Utah Population Database was queried for Current Procedural Terminology codes for ESS from 1996 to 2016. Patient demographics and comorbid diagnoses were collected. Revision rates and risk factors for surgery were determined by Cox proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS: A total of 29,934 patients were identified, with a mean length of follow-up of 9.7 years. The long-term revision rate was found to be 15.9%. The mean time between surgeries decreased with higher number of revision surgeries. The time between the first and second surgery was 4.39 years and the time between the fourth and fifth surgery decreased to 2.18 years. Female gender, older age at first surgery, nasal polyps, comorbid asthma, allergy, and a family history of CRS all increased the risk of requiring revision surgery (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The long-term revision rate for ESS exceeds 15% and the time between revision surgeries decreased with each additional surgery being performed. Unique patient factors increased the risk of requiring revision ESS. Understanding patients' risk for revision surgery may help physicians select and counsel patients with CRS undergoing ESS.

Socioeconomic factors impact quality of life outcomes and olfactory measures in chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare disparities related to socioeconomic factors may adversely impact disease states and treatment outcomes. Among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the impact of socioeconomic factors on outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) remains uncertain. METHODS: Adult patients with refractory CRS were prospectively enrolled into an observational, multi-institutional cohort study between March 2011 and June 2015. Socioeconomic factors analyzed included household income, insurance status, years of education completed, race, age, and ethnicity. Income was stratified according to the Thompson and Hickey model. The 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT) were completed preoperatively and postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 392 patients met inclusion criteria. Higher age and male gender were associated with better mean preoperative SNOT-22 scores (both p < 0.02), whereas Medicare insurance status and male gender were associated with worse preoperative mean BSIT scores (both p < 0.02). Postoperatively, higher household income ($100,001+/year) and lower age were associated with a greater likelihood of improving at least 1 minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on SNOT-22 scores (OR = 2.40 and 1.03, respectively, both p < 0.05), while no factors were associated with increased odds of achieving a MCID on BSIT scores. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative olfactory function and postoperative quality of life (QOL) improvement were associated with metrics of socioeconomic status in patients with CRS electing ESS. The odds of experiencing a clinically meaningful QOL improvement were more than twice as likely for patients with the highest household income level compared to other income tiers. Further investigation is warranted to identify barriers to postoperative improvement.

Biologics in Chronic Rhinosinusitis: An Update and Thoughts for Future Directions.

Background Potential biologic therapies for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a growing field of interest and research. Biologics target specific immune cells or inflammatory pathways within a disease process, increasing drug efficacy while reducing complications. The success of biologics in other inflammatory conditions such as asthma and atopic dermatitis has spurred much of the corresponding research in CRS. A rapid expansion in the volume of research concerning biologic therapies with potential crossover to treating CRS has made it difficult to stay current. Furthermore, much of the literature has been focused on allergy, asthma, and immunology subspecialties. As the role for biologic therapies in CRS continues to expand, it is increasingly important for otolaryngologists to remain up to date on their progression. Objective The objectives of this review are to provide an update on the growing field of biologics for otolaryngologists who treat CRS and discuss potential future areas of research. Methods A literature review of biologic therapies studied in CRS was performed. In addition, a detailed review of all biologic therapies targeting inflammatory markers involved in Th1-, Th2-, and Th17-mediated inflammation was performed to identify potential areas for future research. The role for biologic therapies in CRS, endotypes of CRS, current biologic therapies studies in CRS, and future areas for research were reviewed. Results Sixty-nine unique biologic therapies have been developed for Th1-, Th2-, and Th17-mediated inflammation. Five biologics are currently being investigated for use in patients with CRS with nasal polyposis. Conclusions As the field of biologics continues to expand, remaining up to date on the current literature may help clinicians identify patients who may benefit from biologic therapies. In addition, ongoing research in other inflammatory disorders with shared pathophysiology to CRS may reveal other potential therapies for CRS that have not previously been investigated.