Indications, Efficacy, Safety, and Clinical Outcomes of 585 nm Pulsed Dye Laser in Non-Malignant Laryngeal Lesions: A Systematic Review.

The objective of this manuscript was to review the indications, efficacy, and safety of a 585 nm pulsed dye laser (PDL) in non-malignant laryngeal lesions. Following the PRISMA statement recommendations, three independent authors searched for articles published in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Scielo, and Web of Science. A bias analysis was performed following NICE guidance tools. From the 506 identified publications, 19 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. The PDL improves vocal quality objectively and subjectively in vascular lesions (p < 0.005) and improves vocal quality in patients with dysplasia/leukoplasia without changing the natural history of the disease compared to other treatments. Reinke's edema and granulomas require an average of 1.5 PDL sessions for resolution. Treatment of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis requires multiple sessions, with complete remission achieved in 50-70% of patients. Regardless of the lesion, the tolerance of the procedure under local anesthesia is exceptional (84-97%), and the results in terms of regression and vocal quality are promising. The complication rate is minimal, and the procedure does not interfere with other treatment alternatives. There is no consensus on laser settings. The lack of consistent use in evaluating vocal outcomes, whether objective or subjective, prevents the comparability between studies. The 585 nm pulsed dye laser appears to be an effective and safe therapeutic option in patients with non-malignant laryngeal pathology. Future controlled studies are needed to compare the 585 nm pulsed dye laser with other lasers or cold instrument procedures.

How deep do you go? Clinical prediction of nasopharyngeal depth based on facial measurements.

Nasopharyngeal depth (ND) prediction is clinically relevant in performing medical procedures, and in enhancing technique accuracy and patient safety. Nonetheless, clinical predictive variables and normative data in adults remain limited. This study aimed to determine normative data on ND and its correlation to external facial measurements. A multicenter cross-sectional study obtained data from adults presenting to otolaryngology clinics at five sites in Canada, Italy, and Spain. Investigators compared endoscopically measured depth from the nasal sill (soft tissue between the nasal ala and columella) to nasopharynx along the nasal floor to the "curved distance from the alar-facial groove along the face to the tragus" and "distance from the tragus to a plane perpendicular to the philtrum." When sinus computed tomography images were available, the distance from the nasopharynx to the nasal sill was also collected. 371 patients participated in the study (41% women; 51 years old, SD 18). Average ND was 9.4 cm (SD 0.86) and 10.1 cm (SD 0.9) for women and men, respectively (p < 0.001; 95% CI 0.46-0.86). Perpendicular distance was strongly correlated to ND (r = 0.775; p < 0.001), with an average underestimation of 0.1 cm (SD 0.65; 95% CI 0.06-0.2). The equation: ND (cm) = perpendicular distance*0.773 + 2.344, generated from 271 randomly selected participants, and validated on 100 participants, resulted in a 0.03 cm prediction error (SD 0.61; 95% CI -0.08-0.16). Nasopharyngeal depth can be approximated by the distance from the tragus to a plane perpendicular to the philtrum.

What is the relationship between the size of the adenoids and nasal obstruction? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: adenoidectomy is one of the most common surgical procedure in pediatric otolaryngology practice. Clinical guidelines (such as the Spanish or American) suggest adenoidectomy when the enlargement of the adenoids is associated with nasal obstruction. Nasal endoscopy and cephalograms are adequate methods to estimate the size of the adenoids. However, they do not measure nasal patency. This systematic review is designed with the objective of exploring the relationship between adenoid size and nasal ventilation through rhinomanometry. REVIEW METHODS: 3 authors members of the YO-IFOS rhinology study group independently analyzed the data sources (Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO) for papers assessing both nasal resistance and/or nasal airflow in rhinomanometry and adenoid size by any method (endoscopy, cephalogram, direct examination). RESULTS: A total of 10 studies with a total population of 969 participants met the inclusion criteria. 5 authors explored the size of the adenoids through endoscopy. 4 authors explored the adenoids through lateral cephalograms. Finally, a further 2 authors explored adenoid size studying the resected tissue. Five studies explored the correlation between adenoid size and nasal resistance in rhinomanometry, which ranged from 0.20 to 0.84. Finally, 5 studies used nasal decongestant. It was found higher sensitivity and specificity, a higher area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic curve, and higher correlation with adenoid size for rhinomanometry under nasal decongestion. CONCLUSION: Up to now, there is no ideal diagnostic method for adenoid hypertrophy. Therefore, it seems prudent to use a combination of all currently available tools, as they provide complementary, rather than supplementary information. Available evidence suggests that rhinomanometry combined with nasal decongestant could help to elucidate the existence of nasal obstruction in intermediate cases of adenoid hypertrophy, as well as throw light on other possible causes for nasal obstruction, mainly turbinate hypertrophy.