Prognostic Factors for Survival Using a Clinical Severity Staging System Among Patients With Acute Invasive Fungal Sinusitis.

Importance: Despite the aggressive progression of fulminant acute invasive fungal sinusitis (AIFS), data on prognostic factors have been disparate, hindering the development of a staging system. A composite staging system may improve prognostication for patient counseling and conduct of clinical research. Objective: To identify prognostically important factors in AIFS and to incorporate the factors into a comprehensive Functional Severity Staging System and Clinical Severity Staging System. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients diagnosed with pathology-proven AIFS from June 1, 1992, to December 31, 2022, at Washington University Medical Center and Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a tertiary care center in St Louis, Missouri. Data were analyzed from April to July 2023. Main Outcome and Measures: Sequential sequestration and conjunctive consolidation was used to develop a composite staging system to predict 6-month overall survival. Results: Of 71 patients with pathology-proven AIFS over the 30-year period, the median (range) age of the cohort was 56 (19-63) years, and there were 47 (66%) male patients. The median (range) follow-up time was 2 (0-251) months. There were 28 patients alive within 6 months, for a 39% survival rate. Symptoms, comorbidity burden, and presence and duration of severe neutropenia were associated with 6-month survival and were consolidated into a 3-category Clinical Severity Staging System with 6-month survival of 75% for stage A (n = 16), 41% for stage B (n = 27), and 18% for stage C (n = 28). The discriminative power of the composite staging system was moderate (C statistic, 0.63). Conclusion and Relevance: This cohort study supports the clinical importance of symptomatology, comorbidity burden, and prolonged severe neutropenia at the time of AIFS presentation. The composite clinical staging system may be useful for clinicians when counseling patients with AIFS and conducting clinical research.

How Do Patients and Otolaryngologists Define Dizziness?

OBJECTIVE: To assess for differences in how patients and otolaryngologists define the term dizziness. METHODS: Between June 2020 and December 2022, otolaryngology clinicians and consecutive patients at 5 academic otolaryngology institutions across the United States were asked to define the term "dizziness" by completing a semantics-based questionnaire containing 20 common descriptors of the term within 5 symptom domains (imbalance-related, lightheadedness-related, motion-related, vision-related, and pain-related). The primary outcome was differences between patient and clinician perceptions of dizzy-related symptoms. Secondary outcomes included differences among patient populations by geographic location. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 271 patients and 31 otolaryngologists. Patients and otolaryngologists selected 7.7 ± 3.5 and 7.1 ± 4.3 symptoms, respectively. Most patients (266, 98.2%) selected from more than 1 domain and 17 (6.3%) patients identified symptoms from all 5 domains. Patients and clinicians were equally likely to define dizziness using terms from the imbalance (difference, -2.3%; 95% CI, -13.2%, 8.6%), lightheadedness (-14.1%; -29.2%, 1.0%), and motion-related (9.4; -0.3, 19.1) domains. Patients were more likely to include terms from the vision-related (23.6%; 10.5, 36.8) and pain-related (18.2%; 10.3%, 26.1%) domains. There were minor variations in how patients defined dizziness based on geographic location. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and otolaryngologists commonly described dizziness using symptoms related to imbalance, lightheadedness, and motion. Patients were more likely to use vision or pain-related terms. Understanding of these semantic differences may enable more effective patient-clinician communication.

When inflammation is not just inflammation-A review of systemic diseases of the nose and sinuses part 2: Granulomatosis with polyangiitis and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis is a very common condition. Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (eGPA) are systemic diseases which can contribute to the development of chronic rhinosinusitis in select patients. OBJECTIVE: Characterize the presenting features, diagnostic criteria, workup, and management of granulomatosis with polyangiitis and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis as they are encountered in otolaryngology clinics. METHODS: Full length manuscripts published 2000 or later were reviewed. A separate search was conducted for each disease. Pertinent clinical features related to sinonasal manifestations of GPA and eGPA were collected and reported in this review. RESULTS: 467 references were discovered during literature review process. In total, 42 references for GPA and 35 references for eGPA were included in this review. CONCLUSION: GPA and eGPA are vasculitis syndromes which commonly present in the context of multisystem disease. For GPA, pulmonary and renal disease are common; for eGPA a history of asthma is nearly ubiquitous. Sinonasal disease is a very common feature for both disease processes and may precede the development of systemic symptoms in many patients. Clinical work up and diagnosis is complex and generally requires multidisciplinary care. Treatment primarily consists of immunosuppressive agents, and a number of steroids, steroid sparing agents, and biologics have been shown to be effective. The role of sinus surgery includes tissue biopsy for diagnosis, functional surgery for symptom management in select cases, and reconstruction of cosmetic and functional defects.

When inflammation is not just inflammation-A review of systemic diseases of the nose and sinuses part 1: IgG4-related disease and sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis is a very common condition. IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) and sarcoidosis are systemic diseases which can contribute to the development of chronic rhinosinusitis in select patients. OBJECTIVE: Characterize the presenting features, diagnostic criteria, workup, and management of sinonasal IgG4-RD and sarcoidosis as they are encountered in otolaryngology clinics. METHODS: Full length manuscripts published 2000 or later were reviewed. A separate search was conducted for each disease. Pertinent clinical features related to sinonasal manifestations of IgG4-RD and sarcoidosis were collected and reported in this review. RESULTS: 404 references were discovered during literature review process. In total, 42 references for IgG4-RD and 34 references for sarcoidosis were included in this review. CONCLUSION: IgG4-RD and sarcoidosis are autoimmune inflammatory conditions that can affect many systems of the body. For both disease entities, sinonasal disease is a less common presentation which can lead to delayed diagnosis. Sinonasal IgG4-RD commonly presents in the setting of multisystem disease. All with other clinical features, biopsy plays a key role in the diagnosis for both diseases. Treatment for IgG4-RD consists primarily of steroids and rituximab which can lead to excellent and durable remission. A variety of immunosuppressive agents are used in the management of sarcoidosis. Surgery for IgG4-RD is primarily utilized for tissue biopsy, although resection or debulking may be considered. For sarcoidosis, surgery can be used for tissue biopsy and functional sinus surgery can offer symptomatic relief in many patients.

Are you congested? A comparison of definitions between otolaryngologists and their patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess for differences of intended meaning in the description of congestion-related symptoms among otolaryngology patients and clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 2020 and October 2022, a questionnaire consisting of 16 common descriptors of congestion-related symptoms within four domains (obstructive-related, pressure-related, mucus-related, and other symptoms) was completed by patients and otolaryngologists at five tertiary otolaryngology practices. The primary outcome was to assess differences in patient and clinician perceptions of congestion-related symptoms. Differences based on geographic location was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 349 patients and 40 otolaryngologists participated. Patients selected a median of 6.8 (standard deviation [SD] 3.0) terms compared with 4.0 (SD 1.6) terms for otolaryngologists (p < 0.001). Otolaryngologists were more likely to select obstruction-related symptoms (difference 6.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8%, 8.9%). Patients were more likely to describe congestion using pressure-related (-43.7%; -58.9%, -28.5%), mucus-related (-43.5%; -59.3%, -27.8%), and other symptoms (-44.2; -51.3%, -37.1%) compared with otolaryngologists. There were no significant differences identified based on geographic location with regard to symptom domains on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences between otolaryngologists and their patients in the interpretation of the symptoms of congestion. Clinicians tended to have a narrower interpretation of congestion that was limited to the obstruction-related symptom domain, while patients defined congestion more broadly. This has important counseling and communication implications for the clinician.

Stellate Ganglion Block for the Treatment of COVID-19-Induced Olfactory Dysfunction: A Prospective Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of stellate ganglion blocks (SGBs) to treat persistent COVID-19-induced olfactory dysfunction (OD). Secondarily, the goal was to determine effect sizes to plan a future randomized clinical trial. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case series. SETTING: Quaternary Care Academic Medical Center. METHODS: In this single-arm pilot trial, adult participants with a COVID-19 diagnosis ≥ 12 months prior to enrollment with OD underwent bilateral SGBs. Subjects were followed for 1 month after completion of SGB. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale for smell loss. Secondary outcome measures included changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (ODOR). RESULTS: Twenty participants were enrolled with a mean (SD) age of 46 (11) years and a mean (SD) duration of OD of 21 (5) months. At 1 month, 10 (50%) participants experienced at least slight subjective improvement in their OD, 11 (55%) attained a clinically meaningful improvement in smell identification using the UPSIT, and 7 (35%) achieved a clinically meaningful improvement in olfactory-specific quality of life (QoL) measured by the ODOR. The median difference between UPSIT scores at baseline and 1 month was 6 (95% confidence interval: 3-11), exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of 4. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sequential SGBs for COVID-19-associated OD were safe and associated with modest improvements in subjective olfaction, odor identification, and olfactory-specific QoL. A placebo-controlled trial is warranted to determine the efficacy of SGBs for COVID-19-associated OD.

Development and Validation of the Parosmia Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (DisODOR).

OBJECTIVE: Develop and validate a quality-of-life (QoL) outcome measure for patients with dysosmia. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. SETTING: Otolaryngology clinics, research registries, and Facebook support groups. METHODS: A 59-item pilot survey with questions addressing parosmia concerns was developed using input from subjects with parosmia and clinical expertise from Otolaryngologists. After item reduction, the Parosmia Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (DisODOR) was reduced to its final 29 items. DisODOR maximum score is 116 (each item score 0-4) with higher scores indicating a higher degree of dysfunction from smell distortion. DisODOR was validated using participants with parosmia persisting >3 months after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (cases) and healthy controls. Reliability, face and content validity, internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminative validity, sensitivity to change, and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 134 cases and 20 controls completed DisODOR. The mean (SD) age was 45.9 (12.2) for cases and 29.6 (8.9) for controls. The mean score difference between cases and controls was 45.0 (95% confidence interval, 40.5-49.5) displaying good discriminative validity. DisODOR showed strong test-retest reliability (r = .942) with high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .971). DisODOR had a moderate correlation with SNOT-22 scores (r = .619) indicating good convergent validity. There is an excellent association with the global impression of severity categories (η2 = 0.447). Based on the distribution method, the MCID is 15. CONCLUSION: DisODOR is a valid, reliable QoL instrument for parosmia that can be used to measure the functional impact and QoL impairment for parosmia patients. DisODOR is sensitive to change and thus can be used in studies investigating treatments for parosmia.

Invasive fungal sinusitis risk factors among immunosuppressed hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

KEY POINTS: Invasive fungal sinusitis (IFS) rate and risk factors in transplant recipients were explored IFS rate is higher in allogeneic recipients with prior transplants and worse comorbidity scores The at-risk timeframes for IFS development were identified.

HRCT-MRI fusion: A novel imaging protocol surpasses current modalities in localizing spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid leaks.

KEY POINTS: HRCT-MRI fusion is a new imaging modality that can be used to diagnose spontaneous CSF leaks. HRCT-MRI fusion has better accuracy in localizing CSF leaks compared to MRI and HRCT alone.

Layperson Perception of Reflux-Related Symptoms.

Objective: To assess for differences of intended meaning in the description of reflux-related symptoms among otolaryngology patients and clinicians. Study Design: Cross-sectional survey-based study. Setting: Five tertiary, academic otolaryngology practices. Methods: Between June 2020 and July 2022, a questionnaire consisting of 20 common descriptors of reflux-related symptoms within four domains (throat-, chest-, stomach-, and sensory-related symptoms) was completed by patients. Attending otolaryngologists at five academic medical centers then completed the same survey. The primary outcome was to assess differences in patient and clinician perceptions of reflux-related symptoms. Differences based on geographic location was a secondary outcome. Results: A total of 324 patients and 27 otolaryngologists participated. Patients selected a median of six terms compared with 10.5 for otolaryngologists (p < .001). Otolaryngologists were more likely to select sensory symptoms (difference: 35.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.2%, 52.4%), throat-related symptoms (32.4%; 21.2, 43.6%), and chest-related symptoms (12.4%; 8.8, 15.9). Otolaryngologists and patients were equally likely to consider stomach symptoms as related to reflux (4.0%, -3.7%, 11.7%). No significant differences were identified based on geographic location. Conclusion: There are differences between otolaryngologists and their patients in the interpretation of the symptoms of reflux. Patients tended to have a narrower interpretation of reflux with symptoms primarily limited to classic stomach-related symptoms, while clinicians tended to have a broader definition of reflux that included extra-esophageal manifestations of disease. This has important counseling implications for the clinician, as patients presenting with reflux symptoms may not comprehend the relationship of those symptoms to reflux disease.

Layperson Perception of Symptoms Caused by the Sinuses.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the perceived symptoms caused by the sinuses as defined by otolaryngology patients and clinicians. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional cross-sectional study. SETTING: Six academic outpatient otolaryngology practices. METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional, cross-sectional study using a semantics-based questionnaire. Consecutive patients were enrolled at 6 academic otolaryngology centers from June 2020 to May 2021. The primary outcome examined patient and provider definitions for the symptoms caused by the sinuses from a list of 28 proposed terms covering 6 general categories. These data were also collected from otolaryngology faculty at the same institutions. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 451 patients (54% female, mean age 48.3 years) and 29 otolaryngologists (38% female, mean age 37.4 years). Patients selected a median of 12 terms, compared to 8.5 for otolaryngologists. Among patients, the most frequently selected symptom domains were mucus (419, 92.9%), airflow (412, 91.4%), and pain (389, 86.3%). Compared to clinicians, patients more frequently selected symptoms related to the ear (difference, 48.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 34.8%-59.3%), throat (difference, 35.7%, 95% CI, 22.0%-47.5%), systemic (difference, 34.4%, 95% CI, 21.2%-46.0%), mucus (difference, 20.5%, 95% CI, 10.2%-30.6%), and airflow domains (difference, 19.0%, 95% CI, 8.4%-29.3%). Multiple domains were selected by 98% of patients and 79% of providers. CONCLUSION: Semantic differences exist between patients and clinicians regarding the symptoms caused by the sinus with patients having a broader range of perceived symptoms. These differences may provide clues to improve communication between otolaryngologists and their patients.

What do we mean when we have a "sinus infection?"

INTRODUCTION: Sinus infections are a common reason patients seek medical care. However, the intended meaning of the term sinus infection among patients and otolaryngologists is incompletely understood. METHODS: In this multi-institutional cross-sectional study, a semantics-based questionnaire was provided to consecutive patients presenting to otolaryngology clinics at six academic centers from June 2020 until May 2021. The primary outcome was respondent definitions for sinus infection from a list of 28 proposed terms covering six general categories. Secondary outcome measures included differences between geographic regions. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 560 patients (54% female, mean age 48.9 years) and 29 otolaryngologists (42% female, mean age 37.4 years). Patients and otolaryngologists selected a median of 10 and 11 terms, respectively, to define a sinus infection. Among patients the most frequently selected symptom categories were mucus (500, 89.3%), pressure/pain (480, 85.7%), and airflow (468, 83.6%). Compared to patients, clinicians selected with greater frequency the symptom categories of pressure/pain (14.3% difference; 95% CI, 7.6% to 22.5%), mucus (10.7% difference; 95% CI, 4.7% to 18.3%) and airflow (13.0% difference; 95% CI, 4.8% to 21.7%). Multiple categories were selected by 96% of patients and 100% of providers. CONCLUSION: The definition of sinus infection appears variable for both patients and otolaryngologists, though patients appear to apply a broader range of symptoms to the term sinus infection. There were no pronounced geographic differences in the description of a sinus infection in this US sample population. Patients commonly described sinus infection in the context of pain-related symptoms. Appreciation of these semantic differences may enable more effective patient-clinician communication.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating.

Importance: Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is an increasingly common and morbid condition, especially given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, the ability to reproducibly measure smell loss-associated quality of life (QOL) and its response to treatment is paramount. Objective: To develop and validate a concise and visually appealing smell loss-associated QOL patient-reported outcome measure for OD. Design, Setting, and Participants: A secondary analysis of comments to an online survey by 1000 patients with olfactory dysfunction published in 2013 was used as the primary source to generate items of the Olfactory Dysfunction Outcomes Rating (ODOR). In addition, 30 patients with OD enrolled in 2 clinical studies at a tertiary care medical center (Washington University) were asked to identify their main concerns associated with smell loss. And finally, 4 otolaryngologists reviewed the items generated from the online survey and the patients' interviews to identify any additional items. Prospective study design was used for data collection from the 30 patients and 4 otolaryngologists. Prospective study design was used for survey validation. Validation of the ODOR was performed with 283 patients enrolled in several prospective studies at a single institution that completed the ODOR as an outcome measure. Main Outcomes and Measures: Item generation and selection were the outcomes of ODOR development. The psychometric and clinimetric measures evaluated for validation were internal consistency, test-retest reliability, face and content validity, concurrent validity, and discriminant validity. Minimal clinically important difference was also determined. Results: The ODOR is a 28-item instrument with each item scored as either no difficulty or very rarely bothered (0) to complete difficulty or very frequently bothered (4) with a total instrument score range of 0 to 112 points. Higher scores indicate higher degree of dysfunction and limitation. Validation in the cohort of 283 patients (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [14.4] years; 198 female participants [73%]; 179 White participants [80%]) revealed that the instrument has high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.968), test-retest reliability (r = 0.90 [95% CI, 0.81-0.95]), face validity, content validity, concurrent validity (r = 0.87 [95% CI, 0.80-0.91] compared with the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements; ρ = -0.76 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.71] compared with a patient-reported symptom severity scale), and divergent validity (mean score difference, -33.9 [95% CI, -38.3 to -29.6] between normosmic patients and hyposmic/anosmic patients). The minimal clinically important difference was 15 points. The estimated time for survey completion was approximately 5 minutes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey creation and validation study, the ODOR was shown to be a novel, concise, reliable, and valid patient-reported outcome measure of OD-associated QOL. It can be used to measure physical problems, functional limitations, and emotional consequences associated with OD and how they change after a given intervention, which is clinically applicable and particularly pertinent given the growing burden of OD associated with COVID-19.

Surgery for Pituitary Tumor Apoplexy Is Associated with Rapid Headache and Cranial Nerve Improvement.

Pituitary tumor apoplexy (PTA) classically comprises sudden-onset headache, loss of vision, ophthalmoparesis, and decreased consciousness. It typically results from hemorrhage and/or infarction within a pituitary adenoma. Presentation is heterologous, and optimal management is debated. The time course of recovery of cranial nerve deficits (CNDs) and headaches is not well established. In this study, a retrospective series of consecutive patients with PTA managed at a single academic institution over a 22-year period is presented. Headaches at the time of surgery were more severe in the early and subacute surgical cohort and improved significantly within 72 h postoperatively (p < 0.01). At one year, 90% of CNDs affecting cranial nerves (CNs) 3, 4, and 6 had recovered, with no differences between early (<4 d), subacute (4−14 d), and delayed (>14 d) time-to-surgery cohorts. Remarkably, half recovered within three days. In total, 56% of CN2 deficits recovered, with the early surgery cohort including more severe deficits and recovering at a lower rate (p = 0.01). No correlation of time-to-surgery and rapidity of recovery of CNDs was observed (p = 0.65, 0.72). Surgery for PTA is associated with rapid recovery of CNDs in the early, subacute, and delayed time frames, and with rapid headache improvement in the early and subacute time frames in 50% or more of patients.

Chronic rhinosinusitis as a risk factor for intracranial and extracranial complications after endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery.

PURPOSE: To elucidate whether chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), usually an inflammatory-mediated rather than infectious process, is a risk factor for extracranial and intracranial complications after elective endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETSS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent ETSS between January 2015 and July 2019 was performed, which included chart review and computed tomography assessment. CRS was defined by symptomatology and concurrent endoscopic or radiographic findings. RESULTS: Of 292 subjects, 11% (n = 33) met criteria for CRS. Median difference in Lund-Mackay scores between the CRS and non-CRS groups was 3.0 (95% CI 2.0-4.0). Complications included acute rhinosinusitis requiring antibiotics (23%, 68/292), epistaxis (10%, 28/292), meningitis (1%, 3/292), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak (7%, 20/292), revision sinonasal procedures (10%, 28/292), and frequent in-office debridement (13%, 39/292). CRS was strongly associated with postoperative acute rhinosinusitis (aRR 1.85, 95% CI 1.18-2.90) and frequent debridement (aRR 1.96, 95% CI 1.00-3.83). Conversely, CRS was not associated with epistaxis (aRR 1.52, 95% CI 0.62-3.72), postoperative CSF leak (aRR 0.91, 95% CI 0.24-3.44), or additional sinonasal procedures (aRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.21-2.29). The rate of meningitis was not significantly higher in the CRS cohort (difference 2.2%, 95% CI -1.0% to 14.5%). CONCLUSIONS: CRS was a strong risk factor for acute rhinosinusitis and need for frequent in-office debridement after ETSS. It was not associated with other postoperative complications including epistaxis, CSF leak, or revision sinonasal procedures. CRS patients had a slightly higher rate of meningitis, which is likely not clinically meaningful.

Smell Changes and Efficacy of Nasal Theophylline (SCENT) irrigation: A randomized controlled trial for treatment of post-viral olfactory dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal theophylline saline irrigation on olfactory recovery in patients with post-viral olfactory dysfunction (PVOD). METHODS: Between May 2019 and April 2020, we conducted a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of adults with 6-36 months of PVOD. Patients were randomized to nasal theophylline saline irrigation or placebo saline irrigation twice a day for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the Global Rating of Smell Change. Secondary outcomes were changes in the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (QOD-NS). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (n = 12, theophylline; n = 10, placebo) completed the study. Slightly more patients in the theophylline group (33%) reported improved smell compared to the placebo group (30%, difference 3.3%, 95% CI -35.6% to 42.3%). The median differences in pre- and post-treatment UPSIT and QOD-NS change between the two groups were 1 (95% CI -3 to 5) and -10 (95% CI -15 to -4), respectively in favor of theophylline. Three patients receiving theophylline and 2 receiving placebo had clinically meaningful improvements on the UPSIT (difference 5%, 95% CI -30% to 40%). There were no adverse events, and serum theophylline levels were undetectable in 10/10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: While safe, there were no clinically meaningful differences in olfactory change between the two groups except for olfaction-related quality of life, which was better with theophylline. The imprecise estimates suggest future trials will need substantially larger sample sizes or treatment modifications, such as increasing the theophylline dose, to observe larger treatment effects.

Computed Tomography as a Predictor of Sinonasal Inverted Papilloma Origin, Skull Base Involvement, and Stage.

Objective To investigate the diagnostic performance of computed tomography (CT) to determine the origin, skull base involvement, and stage of sinonasal inverted papilloma (IP). Design This is a retrospective cohort study. Setting This is set at a tertiary care medical center. Participants Patients with preoperative CT imaging who underwent extirpative surgery for histologically confirmed sinonasal IP between January 2005 and October 2019. Main Outcome Measures The likely sites of tumor origin, skull base involvement, and radiographic tumor stage were determined by two board-certified neuroradiologists after re-reviewing preoperative CT imaging. These radiologic findings were then compared with intraoperative and pathologic findings. Results Of 86 patients, 74% (64/86) had IP lesions with correctly classified sites of origin on CT. CT was not sensitive for diagnosing ethmoid sinus origin (48%, 52%), frontal sinus origin (80%, 40%), and skull base origin (17%, 17%). CT was not sensitive (62%, 57%) but specific (86%, 98%) for identifying any skull base involvement. There was substantial-to-near perfect agreement between radiographic and pathologic Cannady stages (weighted κ = 0.61 for rater 1; weighted κ = 0.81 for rater 2). Interrater agreement was substantial for identifying tumor origin (κ = 0.75) and stage (weighted κ = 0.62) and moderate for identifying skull base involvement (κ = 0.43). Conclusion Interrater agreement on CT findings was substantial except on skull base involvement. CT correctly predicted site of tumor origin in up to 74% of subjects. CT was not sensitive for diagnosing skull base involvement but had substantial-to-near perfect agreement with pathologic tumor staging. CT is a useful but albeit limited adjunct for tumor localization and surgical planning for sinonasal IP.

Use of Off-Label Nasal Steroid Irrigations in Long-Term Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses and mucosa. Topical nasal corticosteroids are a mainstay treatment for CRS by reducing sinonasal inflammation and improving mucociliary clearance. However, topical corticosteroids have limited paranasal distribution, and patient response to treatment has been variable in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Thus, there is significant interest in evaluating the efficacy of nasal steroids delivered by nasal irrigation in order to improve penetration and absorption of topical steroids into the sinonasal mucosa. In this review, we discuss the use of off-label nasal steroid irrigations in the management of CRS. METHODS: A review of clinical trials evaluating the use of nasal steroid irrigations for CRS in the PubMed electronic database was performed. RESULTS: Of the 12 clinical studies identified, 10 evaluated budesonide irrigations while the remaining 2 focused on mometasone. The overwhelming majority of studies for both budesonide and mometasone supported the use of nasal irrigations with corticosteroids over nasal corticosteroid sprays alone. However, the heterogeneity in study design, patient cohort, and volume of steroid irrigation limit the interpretations of these studies. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal irrigation with corticosteroids is beneficial and safe for the treatment of CRS. Future RCTs controlling for type of surgical intervention, CRS pheno- and endo-type, as well as dosing and duration of nasal corticosteroid irrigations are warranted.