Effect of Omega-3 Supplementation in Patients With Smell Dysfunction Following Endoscopic Sellar and Parasellar Tumor Resection: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic endonasal approaches pose the potential risk of olfactory loss. Loss of olfaction and potentially taste can be permanent and greatly affect patients' quality of life. Treatments for olfactory loss have had limited success. Omega-3 supplementation may be a therapeutic option with its effect on wound healing and nerve regeneration. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on olfaction in patients treated with omega-3 supplementation following endoscopic skull base tumor resection. METHODS: In this multi-institutional, prospective, randomized controlled trial, 110 patients with sellar or parasellar tumors undergoing endoscopic resection were randomized to nasal saline irrigations or nasal saline irrigations plus omega-3 supplementation. The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) was administered preoperatively and at 6 wk, 3 mo, and 6 mo postoperatively. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients completed all 6 mo of follow-up (41 control arm, 46 omega-3 arm). At 6 wk postoperatively, 25% of patients in both groups experienced a clinically significant loss in olfaction. At 3 and 6 mo, patients receiving omega-3 demonstrated significantly less persistent olfactory loss compared to patients without supplementation (P = .02 and P = .01, respectively). After controlling for multiple confounding variables, omega-3 supplementation was found to be protective against olfactory loss (odds ratio [OR] 0.05, 95% CI 0.003-0.81, P = .03). Tumor functionality was a significant independent predictor for olfactory loss (OR 32.7, 95% CI 1.15-929.5, P = .04). CONCLUSION: Omega-3 supplementation appears to be protective for the olfactory system during the healing period in patients who undergo endoscopic resection of sellar and parasellar masses.

Hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing office-based sinus procedures under local anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to characterize changes in hemodynamics, pain, and anxiety during office-based endoscopic sinus procedures performed under local anesthesia. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of adults undergoing in-office endoscopic sinus procedures under local anesthesia. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification System class 1 or 2 were included. Anesthesia was administered by topical 4% lidocaine/oxymetazoline and submucosal injection of 1% lidocaine/1:200,000 epinephrine. Vital signs and pain were measured at baseline, postinjection, and 5-minute intervals throughout the procedure. Anxiety levels were scored using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors significantly associated with changes in each hemodynamic metric. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were studied. This cohort was 52% male, mean age of 57.8 ± 14.4 years, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) median of 2. Mean procedure duration was 25.0 ± 10.3 minutes. Mean maximal increase in systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 24.6 ± 17.8 mmHg from baseline. Mean maximal heart rate increase was 22.8 ± 10.8 beats per minute (bpm) from baseline. In multivariate regression analysis, when accounting for patient age, cardiac comorbidity, CCI, and ASA, older age was significantly associated with an increase of >20 mmHg in SBP (p = 0.043). Mean pain score during procedures was 1.5 ± 1.3 with a mean maximum of 4.0 ± 2.6. STAI anxiety scores did not change significantly from preprocedure to postprocedure (32.8 ± 11.6 to 31.0 ± 12.6, p = 0.46). No medical complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Although patients appear to tolerate office procedures well, providers should recognize the potential for significant fluctuations in blood pressure during the procedure, especially in older patients.

Cryosurgical ablation for treatment of rhinitis: A prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of cryoablation of the posterior nasal nerve (PNN) for treatment of chronic rhinitis. METHODS: This was a prospective single-arm trial of 98 adult patients at six U.S. centers with chronic allergic and nonallergic rhinitis. PNN cryoablation was performed in-office under local anesthesia using a handheld device. Patients discontinued use of intranasal ipratropium 3 days prior to treatment and throughout the study period. Reflective Total Nasal Symptom Score (rTNSS) was measured at pretreatment baseline and posttreatment at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months. The Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) was completed at pretreatment and 3 months posttreatment. Adverse effects and postprocedure medication usage were recorded. RESULTS: Ninety-eight procedures (100%) were successfully completed. rTNSS significantly improved over pretreatment baseline (6.1 ± 1.9) at 1 month (2.9 ± 1.9, P < 0.001), 3 months (3.0 ± 2.3, P < 0.001), 6 months (3.0 ± 2.1, P < 0.001), and 9 months (3.0 ± 2.4, P < 0.001) postprocedure. Nasal congestion and rhinorrhea subscores improved significantly at all time points (P < 0.001). Both allergic and nonallergic rhinitis subcohorts showed improvement (P < 0.001), with a comparable degree of improvement between groups. RQLQ significantly improved over pretreatment baseline (3.0 ± 1.0) at 3 months (1.5 ± 1.0, P < 0.001), and all RQLQ subdomains demonstrated improvement. Of 54 patients using intranasal medication at baseline, 19 (35.2%) were able to discontinue use. Twenty-nine adverse effects were reported, including headache, epistaxis, and sinusitis. CONCLUSION: Cryoablation of the PNN for chronic rhinitis is safe and can result in relief of nasal symptoms and improvements in quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 130: 1877-1884, 2020.

Microcurrent technology for rapid relief of sinus pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation has proven to be effective in alleviating chronic pain from facial myalgias. We evaluated the efficacy of a novel handheld microcurrent-emitting device in short-term, office-based treatment of patients with sinus pain. This device, which is U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-cleared, detects and treats regions corresponding to nerve fibers. METHODS: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Seventy-one participants with facial pain attributed to self-reported nasal/sinus disease were recruited from a tertiary rhinologic practice and the surrounding community and randomly assigned to either office-based use of an active (n = 38) or placebo (n = 33) microcurrent emitter. The study device was repetitively applied by each patient to the bilateral periorbital areas for 5 minutes. A visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain severity was administered before, and 10 minutes after, treatment. RESULTS: Active microcurrent-treated patients had a reduction in mean pain score from 5.63 pretreatment to 3.97 posttreatment (mean difference, 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 2.12). Patients using the sham device also reported sinus pain reductions (mean difference, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.21). However, the active device demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in pain compared to sham (0.75-point difference, p = 0.007). Notably, 23.7% of patients using the active device had a reduction of 3 or more points by VAS compared to 0% of sham device patients (p = 0.003). One minor occurrence of transient facial skin erythema was noted. CONCLUSION: This trial suggests that treatment of rhinologic facial pain using this noninvasive microcurrent device is safe and effective in providing rapid relief of nasal/sinus pain. Additional studies with longer term follow-up are warranted.

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR). METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. RESULTS: The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR. CONCLUSION: This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.

Outcomes of chronic frontal sinusitis treated with ethmoidectomy: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: In medically refractory chronic frontal sinusitis, ethmoidectomy without instrumentation of the frontal ostium may resolve frontal disease. Our aim was to determine the efficacy of ethmoidectomy alone for the treatment of chronic frontal sinusitis. METHODS: Adults with chronic rhinosinusitis prospectively enrolled in a multicenter study who demonstrated frontal sinusitis on computed tomography were divided into 2 groups: (1) endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) incorporating ethmoidectomy, but excluding frontal sinusotomy; and (2) ESS incorporating frontal sinusotomy. The primary outcome was improvement in 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores. Secondary outcomes included endoscopic scores and use of corticosteroids and antibiotics. RESULTS: A total of 196 cases undergoing frontal sinusotomy and 30 cases treated with ethmoidectomy without frontal sinusotomy were analyzed and were comparable demographically. The prevalence of nasal polyps, previous ESS, asthma, and aspirin intolerance was more common in the frontal sinusotomy group (p < 0.050). Preoperative endoscopy and computed tomography scores were higher in the frontal sinusotomy group (p ≤ 0.001). Postoperatively, both groups showed comparable SNOT-22 scores with worse endoscopy scores in the frontal sinusotomy group (p = 0.038). Postoperative improvement in SNOT-22 total and subdomain scores was comparable between groups. Nasal endoscopy scores improved to a greater degree in the frontal sinusotomy group (p = 0.023). Duration of postoperative topical steroid use was higher in the frontal sinusotomy group (p = 0.007). Revision surgery was needed in 2.6% of frontal sinusotomy patients and 0% of patients without frontal sinusotomy. CONCLUSION: The treatment of chronic frontal sinusitis through ethmoidectomy is a potential alternative to frontal sinusotomy achieving similar quality of life (QOL) improvements in patients manifesting less severe sinus disease.