Asymptomatic Dysphagia and Aspiration in Patients with Idiopathic Bronchiectasis.

PURPOSE: Although considered contributors to idiopathic bronchiectasis (IB), neither dysphagia nor silent aspiration have been systematically evaluated in IB patients. We aimed to explore the prevalence of asymptomatic dysphagia and silent aspiration in IB patients and to identify parameters predictive of their presence. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included IB patients from our Pulmonary Institute without prior history of dysphagia and without prior dysphagia workup. Swallowing function was assessed by the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) questionnaire and by the Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) test. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients (31 females, mean age 67 ± 16 years) were recruited. An EAT-10 score ≥ 3 (risk for swallowing problems) was present in 21 patients (44.6%). Forty-two patients (89.3%) had at least one abnormal swallowing parameter in the FEES test. Six patients (12.7%) had a penetration aspiration score (PAS) in the FEES of at least 6, indicating aspiration. An EAT-10 score of 3 was found to be the ideal cutoff to predict aspiration in the FEES, with a good level of accuracy (area under the curve = 0.78, 95% CI 0.629-0.932, p = 0.03) and sensitivity of 83%. This cutoff also showed a trend towards a more severe disease using the FACED (forced expiratory volume, age, colonization with pseudomonas, extension of lung involvement, dyspnea) score (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Dysphagia is prevalent in IB and may be undiagnosed if not specifically sought. We recommend screening all patients with IB for dysphagia by the EAT-10 questionnaire and referring all those with a score of ≥ 3 to formal swallowing assessment.

Antibiotics or Tonsillectomy for Adult Recurrent Tonsillitis: Analyzing the Lesser of Two Evils.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the best timing for surgical intervention for adults with recurrent tonsillitis (RT). METHODS: A Markov model was constructed using variables and ranges based upon a literature review. A 1-way sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the number of yearly bouts at which each algorithm (antibiotics or tonsillectomy) would be favored. A Monte-Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis was calculated for gains and cost. Model outcomes were measured with quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) for tonsillectomy versus repeat antibiotic treatment. RESULTS: Patients expected to sustain a single annual tonsillitis event will have a negative QALY of 0.02 if treated with surgery and those with 2 annual events will have a QALY gain from undergoing tonsillectomy of 0.01, 3 events = 0.03, 4 events = 0.05, 5 events = 0.07, 6 events = 0.09, 7 events = 0.1, and 8 events = 0.11. These gains became meaningful only after 2 years of recurrent bouts. The average cost of tonsillectomy was 3,238 USD, and the overall average cost of RT was 7,069 USD (an incremental cost of 3,831 USD). The ICER of tonsillectomy over antibiotic treatment for 1 QALY gain was 44,741 USD. CONCLUSION: Adult patients who sustain more than 3 annual bouts of tonsillitis over a period of at least 2 years will gain QALY after tonsillectomy. These gains increase proportionally to the number of yearly events and perennial episodes. The incremental costs of tonsillectomy fail to meet the NICE guidelines but are within other acceptable reference ranges. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:2153-2161, 2024.