Nonallergic Rhinopathy: A Comprehensive Review of Classification, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Chronic nonallergic rhinitis syndromes encompass various conditions, of which vasomotor rhinitis is the most common form, representing approximately 80% of patients, also referred to as nonallergic rhinopathy (NAR), nasal hyperreactivity, neurogenic rhinitis, or idiopathic rhinitis. Expert panels have recommended replacing vasomotor rhinitis terminology because it is more descriptive of this condition that is characterized by symptoms triggered by chemical irritants and weather changes through chemosensors, mechanosensors, thermosensors, and/or osmosensors activated through different transient receptor potential calcium ion channels. Elucidating the specific role of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1, triggered by capsaicin, has been an important advancement in better understanding the pathophysiology of NAR because it has now been shown that downregulation of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 receptors by several therapeutic compounds provides symptomatic relief for this condition. The classification of NAR is further complicated by its association with allergic rhinitis referred to as mixed rhinitis, which involves both immunoglobulin E-mediated and neurogenic mechanistic pathways. Comorbidities associated with NAR, including rhinosinusitis, headaches, asthma, chronic cough, and sleep disturbances, underscore the need for comprehensive management. Treatment options for NAR include environmental interventions, pharmacotherapy, and in refractory cases, surgical options, emphasizing the need for a tailored approach for each patient. Thus, it is extremely important to accurately diagnose NAR because inappropriate therapies lead to poor clinical outcomes and unnecessary health care and economic burdens for these patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of NAR subtypes, focusing on classification, diagnosis, and treatment approaches for NAR.

Executive Summary of Clinical Practice Guideline on Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Plain Language Summary: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

The plain language summary explains allergen immunotherapy to patients, families, and caregivers. The summary is for patients aged 5 years and older who are experiencing symptoms from inhalant allergies and are considering immunotherapy as a treatment option. It is based on the 2024 "Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy." This plain language summary is a companion publication to the full guideline, which provides greater detail for health care providers. Guidelines and their recommendations may not apply to every patient, but they can be used to find best practices and quality improvement opportunities.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Assessment of Demographic Changes of Workforce Diversity in Otolaryngology, 2013 to 2022.

Importance: Given the growth of minoritized groups in the US and the widening racial and ethnic health disparities, improving diversity remains a proposed solution in the field of otolaryngology. Evaluating current trends in workforce diversity may highlight potential areas for improvement. Objective: To understand the changes in gender, racial, and ethnic diversity in the otolaryngology workforce in comparison with changes in the general surgery and neurosurgery workforces from 2013 to 2022. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used publicly available data from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the Association of American Medical Colleges for 2013 to 2022, and included medical students and trainees in all US medical residency programs and allopathic medical schools. Main Outcomes and Measures: Average percentages of women, Black, and Latino trainees during 2 intervals of 5 years (2013-2017 and 2018-2022). Pearson χ2 tests compared demographic information. Normalized ratios were calculated for each demographic group in medical school and residency. Piecewise linear regression assessed linear fit for representation across time periods and compared rates of change. Results: The study population comprised 59 865 medical residents (43 931 [73.4%] women; 6203 [10.4%] Black and 9731 [16.2%] Latino individuals; age was not reported). The comparison between the 2 study intervals showed that the proportions of women, Black, and Latino trainees increased in otolaryngology (2.9%, 0.7%, and 1.6%, respectively), and decreased for Black trainees in both general surgery and neurosurgery (-0.4% and -1.0%, respectively). In comparison with their proportions in medical school, Latino trainees were well represented in general surgery, neurosurgery, and otolaryngology (normalized ratios [NRs]: 1.25, 1.06, and 0.96, respectively); however, women and Black trainees remained underrepresented in general surgery, neurosurgery, and otolaryngology (women NRs, 0.76, 0.33, and 0.68; Black NRs, 0.63, 0.61, and 0.29, respectively). The percentage of women, Black, and Latino trainees in otolaryngology all increased from 2020 to 2022 (2.5%, 1.1%, and 1.1%, respectively). Piecewise regression showed positive trends across all 3 specialties. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study indicate a positive direction but only a modest increase of diversity in otolaryngology, particularly in the context of national demographic data. Novel strategies should be pursued to supplement existing efforts to increase diversity in otolaryngology.

Otolaryngology Away Subinternships: An Analysis of the Application Process and Survey of Current Applicants' Perspectives.

Objective: To assess the availability and uniformity of application information for away subinternships and survey 4th-year medical students on their experiences obtaining away subinternships in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) during the 2022 to 2023 application cycle. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Online survey. Methods: The Association of American Medical College's Visiting Student Learning Opportunities (VSLO) program was queried for information on OHNS away subinternship applications. A survey assessing 4th-year medical students' perceptions of the away subinternship application process was distributed via OHNS residency program directors and Otomatch. Results: Of 129 OHNS residency programs, 103 (80%) offered away subinternship opportunities on VSLO. Variability in application release dates (January 18 to June 3, 2022), offer release dates (January 27 to August 7, 2022), and estimated cost ($22-$5500) were found. The most common application requirements were a transcript (98.1%) and a CV/resume (90.3%). There were 64 survey respondents, for a 13% response rate. The most common concerns include applying to too few programs (80%) and not knowing offer release dates (77%). The most common stressors include choosing a number of programs to which to apply (48%) and cost (35%). The majority (76%) reported difficulty finding updated information on program websites. Among the proposed changes, the greatest support was found for having all applications on VSLO (88%), uniform application release date (84%), and uniform application requirements (82%). Conclusion: The OHNS away subinternship application process is a significant source of anxiety for medical students due to the tremendous variability in application and acceptance procedures. Having all applications on VSLO, uniform application requirements, and uniform application opening and offer release dates would better facilitate this process.

Nasal allergen challenge (NAC): Practical aspects and applications from an EU/US perspective-a Work Group Report of the AAAAI Rhinitis, Rhinosinusitis and Ocular Allergy Committee.

Nasal allergen challenge (NAC) is applied in a variety of settings (research centers, specialty clinics, and hospitals) as a useful diagnostic and research tool. NAC is indicated for diagnosis of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, local allergic rhinitis, and occupational rhinitis; to design the composition of allergen immunotherapy in patients who are polysensitized; and to investigate the physio-pathological mechanisms of nasal diseases. NAC is currently a safe and reproducible technique, although it is time- and resource-consuming. NAC can be performed by a variety of methods, but the lack of a uniform technique for performing and recording the outcomes represents a challenge for those considering NAC as a clinical tool in the office. The availability of standardized allergens for NAC is also different in each country. The objective of this workgroup report is to review the current information about NAC, focusing on the practical aspects and application for diagnosis of difficult rhinitis phenotypes (eg, local allergic rhinitis, occupational rhinitis), taking into account the particular context of practice in the United States and the European Union.

Review of evidence supporting the use of nasal corticosteroid irrigation for chronic rhinosinusitis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze published reports on the efficacy and safety of CSI in CRS and evaluate the clinical implications of current gaps in evidence. Corticosteroid irrigation (CSI) is commonly used for management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps; however, such use is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). DATA SOURCES: Publications were obtained through PubMed searches through January 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Searches were conducted using 2 terms: "chronic rhinosinusitis" or "nasal polyps" as the first term and "corticosteroid irrigation," "steroid nasal lavage," or "sinus rinse" as the second term. We reviewed relevant, peer-reviewed literature (19 original research [9 controlled, 10 uncontrolled trials], 7 reviews, and 1 meta-analysis) reporting safety and efficacy of CSI in patients with CRS. RESULTS: Studies were difficult to compare because they used a variety of solution volumes (60 mL to 125 mL per nostril), corticosteroid agents (budesonide, betamethasone, mometasone, or fluticasone), corticosteroid doses, preparation protocols (by compounding pharmacy or by patient), and administration (frequency, time of day, body positioning). It is difficult to determine which parameters might substantially influence clinical effects because studies were generally small, showed marginal benefits, and rarely assessed safety. To date, no studies evaluating CSI have shown statistically significant differences in a type-I error-controlled primary end point over any comparator, possibly owing to small sample sizes. CONCLUSION: Designing more robust clinical trials may help determine whether CSI is a valid treatment option. Until more evidence supporting CSI use exists, health care professionals should strongly consider choosing FDA-approved therapies for the treatment of CRS.

Systemic Bevacizumab for Severe Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis.

Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP) is the most common benign pediatric laryngeal neoplasm. Various adjuvant medical therapies have failed to reliably decrease surgical frequency in this challenging airway disease. Recently, systemic bevacizumab has shown promise in advanced, treatment-resistant papillomatosis. We describe the use of systemic bevacizumab in two children with severe RRP unresponsive to other therapies. Voice and breathing improved dramatically in both patients with minimal side effects. Both patients have not required surgery in 24 months and 16 months, respectively. Systemic bevacizumab is a promising long-term treatment for severe RRP, with oncology playing an important role in patient care.

Yardstick for the medical management of chronic rhinosinusitis.

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory condition of the paranasal sinuses defined by classic symptoms, imaging findings, or endoscopic findings. There are a growing number of emerging pharmacologic therapies being evaluated to treat patients with CRS, some of which have gained indication status in the United States. There have not been updated treatment guidelines published in the United States however since 2014. This document is meant to serve as an updated expert consensus document for the pharmacologic management of patients with CRS. We review available data focusing on prospective clinical trials on oral and intranasal corticosteroids, nasal irrigation, biologics, antibiotics, and allergy immunotherapy for CRS both with and without nasal polyposis, including specific therapies for aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease-associated CRS and allergic fungal CRS. There are multiple options to treat CRS, and clinicians should be knowledgeable on the efficacy and risks of these available therapies. Allergists-immunologists now have various therapies available to treat patients with CRS.

Improvement in Central Sleep Apnea Following Adenotonsillectomy in Children.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies examining changes in central sleep apnea (CSA) following adenotonsillectomy (T&A) performed for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in children have been limited by sample size and analysis of only certain populations. The aim of this study was to determine whether CSA improves following T&A and what factors mediate this change. METHODS: This was a retrospective case series from 1994 to 2020 of children undergoing primary T&A for OSA (obstructive apnea-hypopnea index ≥1) with CSA (central apnea index [CAI] ≥1) and preoperative and postoperative polysomnograms within 12 months of T&A. Polysomnograms were analyzed for improvement in CSA, defined as: 1) if preoperative CAI >5, a postoperative CAI <5; or 2) if preoperative CAI <5, a postoperative CAI <1. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients were included. Median age was 5.5 years (interquartile range, 2.9-8.4). Most patients were overweight/obese (58.5%). Nineteen (15.4%) had a syndromic condition. Preoperative CAI was ≥5 in 21 (17.1%) patients. CAI significantly decreased following T&A (preoperative 2.1, postoperative 0.4; P < .001). Thirty-two (26.0%) patients had CSA postoperatively. Improvement in the microarousal index and older age were significantly associated with improvement in CSA. CONCLUSIONS: T&A led to resolution of CSA in most children with OSA. Improvement in the microarousal index was associated with improvement in CAI, suggesting that preoperative central apneas may be postarousal and thus resolve following T&A. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 132:478-484, 2022.

Leveraging the universal newborn hearing screen to impact parental knowledge of childhood speech development in low socioeconomic populations: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of a video intervention administered at the time of the universal newborn hearing screen on caregiver knowledge of infant cognitive and language development in low socioeconomic status English-speaking parents. METHODS: A parallel-group, single-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted from April to August 2016. Eligible participants were at least 18 years, delivered a singleton neonate, English speaking, and designated as low socioeconomic status based on household income and level of education. A total of 112 patients, 54 treatment and 58 control, completed the study and were included in the analysis. The Baby Survey of Parent/Provider Expectations and Knowledge, a validated 24-item questionnaire assessing child development knowledge, was the primary study outcome. The survey was conducted at baseline, 1 day after intervention, and 4-6 weeks later. A one-way, repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to evaluate for differences in the three time points. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 25.6 years and 85% identified as African-American. There was no significant difference in scores prior to and following the intervention for the control group (N = 58, F = 1.67, p = 0.19); however, a significant difference in scores was found in the treatment group (N = 54, F = 7.95, p < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis showed a significant improvement in scores 1 day after intervention, but no difference 4-6 weeks later. CONCLUSION: Educational video intervention for low socioeconomic mothers at the time of the universal newborn hearing screen can positively increase knowledge related to hearing and language development in the short term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pilot Study of Novel Postpartum Educational Video Intervention NCT02267265 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02267265.

Systemic Bevacizumab for Treatment of Respiratory Papillomatosis: International Consensus Statement.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study is to develop consensus on key points that would support the use of systemic bevacizumab for the treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP), and to provide preliminary guidance surrounding the use of this treatment modality. STUDY DESIGN: Delphi method-based survey series. METHODS: A multidisciplinary, multi-institutional panel of physicians with experience using systemic bevacizumab for the treatment of RRP was established. The Delphi method was used to identify and obtain consensus on characteristics associated with systemic bevacizumab use across five domains: 1) patient characteristics; 2) disease characteristics; 3) treating center characteristics; 4) prior treatment characteristics; and 5) prior work-up. RESULTS: The international panel was composed of 70 experts from 12 countries, representing pediatric and adult otolaryngology, hematology/oncology, infectious diseases, pediatric surgery, family medicine, and epidemiology. A total of 189 items were identified, of which consensus was achieved on Patient Characteristics (9), Disease Characteristics (10), Treatment Center Characteristics (22), and Prior Workup Characteristics (18). CONCLUSION: This consensus statement provides a useful starting point for clinicians and centers hoping to offer systemic bevacizumab for RRP and may serve as a framework to assess the components of practices and centers currently using this therapy. We hope to provide a strategy to offer the treatment and also to provide a springboard for bevacizumab's use in combination with other RRP treatment protocols. Standardized delivery systems may facilitate research efforts and provide dosing regimens to help shape best-practice applications of systemic bevacizumab for patients with early-onset or less-severe disease phenotypes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Laryngoscope, 131:E1941-E1949, 2021.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021.

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: BACKGROUND: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR-RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR-RS-2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence-based findings of the document. METHODS: ICAR-RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence-based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence-based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. RESULTS: ICAR-RS-2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence-based management algorithm is provided. CONCLUSION: This ICAR-RS-2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence-based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

Rhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update.

This comprehensive practice parameter for allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) provides updated guidance on diagnosis, assessment, selection of monotherapy and combination pharmacologic options, and allergen immunotherapy for AR. Newer information about local AR is reviewed. Cough is emphasized as a common symptom in both AR and NAR. Food allergy testing is not recommended in the routine evaluation of rhinitis. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) remain the preferred monotherapy for persistent AR, but additional studies support the additive benefit of combination treatment with INCS and intranasal antihistamines in both AR and NAR. Either intranasal antihistamines or INCS may be offered as first-line monotherapy for NAR. Montelukast should only be used for AR if there has been an inadequate response or intolerance to alternative therapies. Depot parenteral corticosteroids are not recommended for treatment of AR due to potential risks. While intranasal decongestants generally should be limited to short-term use to prevent rebound congestion, in limited circumstances, patients receiving regimens that include an INCS may be offered, in addition, an intranasal decongestant for up to 4 weeks. Neither acupuncture nor herbal products have adequate studies to support their use for AR. Oral decongestants should be avoided during the first trimester of pregnancy. Recommendations for use of subcutaneous and sublingual tablet allergen immunotherapy in AR are provided. Algorithms based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion are provided to guide in the selection of pharmacologic options for intermittent and persistent AR and NAR.

Pediatric Modification of the Medically Necessary, Time-Sensitive Scoring System for Operating Room Procedure Prioritization During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced surgeons to reconsider concepts of "elective" operations. Perceptions about the time sensitivity and medical necessity of a procedure have taken on greater significance during the pandemic. The evolving ethical and clinical environment requires reappraisal of perioperative factors, such as personal protective equipment conservation; limiting the risk of exposure to COVID-19 for patients, families, and healthcare workers; preservation of hospital beds and ICU resources; and minimizing COVID-19-related perioperative risk to patients. STUDY DESIGN: A scaffold for the complex decision-making required for prioritization of medically necessary, time-sensitive (MeNTS) operations was developed for adult patients by colleagues at the University of Chicago. Although adult MeNTS scoring can be applied across adult surgical specialties, some variables were irrelevant in a pediatric population. Pediatric manifestations of chronic diseases and congenital anomalies were not accounted for. To account for the unique challenges children face, we modified the adult MeNTS system for use across pediatric subspecialties. RESULTS: This pediatric MeNTS scoring system was applied to 101 cases both performed and deferred between March 23 and April 19, 2020 at the University of Chicago Comer Children's Hospital. The pediatric MeNTS scores provide a safe, equitable, transparent, and ethical strategy to prioritize children's surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This process is adaptable to individual institutions and we project it will be useful during the acute phase of the pandemic (maximal limitations), as well as the anticipated recovery phase.

A Surgical Safety Checklist for Performing Tracheotomy in Patients with Coronavirus Disease 19.

Performance of tracheotomy is a potential necessary step in the patient with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and prolonged mechanical ventilation. Due to viral aerosolization, tracheotomy carries a high risk of transmission of COVID-19 to the health care team performing the procedure. We share our institution's surgical safety checklist for performing tracheotomy in patients with COVID-19, including key modifications intended to mitigate risk to the surgical team.

A Pragmatic Approach Towards Sinonasal Diseases.

Sinonasal disease in its multiple forms affects billions of people worldwide. Although physicians train to precisely diagnose a patient and then treat appropriately, the sheer number of people afflicted with sinonasal disease precludes this approach. We argue that patients should first be treated with an intranasal corticosteroid for 2 weeks. Based on their perceived response, they should be triaged. Those who respond well can be instructed on how to continue to manage their disease. Those who do not would be referred to allergists or otolaryngologists for diagnosis and treatment. We believe this pragmatic approach is safe, provided first-line physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners recognize some warning symptoms and signs of serious, but infrequently occurring, sinonasal diseases that would not lend themselves to this proposed approach.