My Favorite Sinus.

This essay reflects on the author's approach to interviewing applicants for medical residency in the otolaryngology department.

Posterior Nasal Nerve Ablation as a Viable Treatment Option for the Primary Symptom of Postnasal Drip.

BACKGROUND: Postnasal drip (PND) syndrome is a prevalent complaint encountered in otolaryngology practices. PND may be refractory to medical therapy, and surgical treatments are complicated by side effects. OBJECTIVE: While posterior nasal nerve (PNN) ablation has demonstrated efficacy for chronic rhinitis overall, we sought to examine the effect of PNN ablation for patients with PND as their primary complaint. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series study of 40 chronic rhinitis (CR) patients with a primary complaint of PND. Included patients had to have failed medical therapy such as anti-cholinergic nasal sprays, reflux treatments, and/or nasal steroids. Primary outcome measures included 22 item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) PND component and Total Nasal Symptom Score. Secondary outcome measure was subjective improvement, defined as a > 30% improvement in PND symptoms. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 138 days (interquartile range: 72-193). 72.5% (29/40) of patients reported at least a 30% improvement in PND symptoms. Mean PND SNOT-22 scores were 4.2/5 (SD = 0.8) pre-procedure versus 1.9/5 (SD = 1.3) post-procedure (P = .001). PNN ablation response did not correlate to ipratropium bromide nasal spray response, although younger and non-smoker patients had better response rates. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study of PNN ablation for the primary symptom of PND demonstrates efficacy as assessed by the PND component of SNOT-22 and subjective improvement. These results can be useful in guiding physician-patient discussions in determining treatment options for medically refractory PND.

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.

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.

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.

Inaccurate penicillin allergy labels: Consequences, solutions, and opportunities for rhinologists.

A patient-reported history of penicillin allergy is a common label with a prevalence of about 10%. However, as many as 95% of patients reporting a penicillin allergy do not have a true immunoglobin-E (IgE)-mediated allergic reaction. Unfortunately, penicillin allergy mislabeling is problematic, leading to inappropriate antibiotic use and negative consequences, such as adverse drug events, suboptimal outcomes, and increased costs. As physicians who treat patients of all ages for common sinonasal pathology in the clinic and operating room in addition to frequently providing testing and management of allergic diseases, rhinologists are well positioned to aid in delabeling patients with inaccurate penicillin allergies. This viewpoint highlights the consequences of inaccurate penicillin allergy designation in the clinic and perioperative period and explores misconceptions regarding cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins. Opportunities are explored for shared decision-making with colleagues in other specialties, such as anesthesiology, and practical recommendations are provided to aid rhinologists when faced with a patient who holds a questionable history of penicillin allergy. Rhinologists can play an active role in delabeling patients with inaccurate penicillin allergies with the goal of ensuring appropriate antibiotic use for future medical encounters.

Determinants of physician assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control using EPOS 2020 criteria and the importance of incorporating patient perspectives of disease control.

BACKGROUND: We identify chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) manifestations associated with how rhinologists assess CRS control, with a focus on patient perspectives (patient-reported CRS control). METHODS: Fifteen rhinologists were provided with real-world data from 200 CRS patients. Participating rhinologists first classified patients' CRS control as "controlled," "partly controlled," and "uncontrolled" using seven CRS manifestations reflecting European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) CRS control criteria (nasal obstruction, drainage, impaired smell, facial pain/pressure, sleep disturbance, use of systemic antibiotics/corticosteroids in past 6 months, and nasal endoscopy findings) and patient-reported CRS control. They then classified patients' CRS control without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control. Interrater reliability and agreement of rhinologist-assessed CRS control with patient-reported CRS control and EPOS guidelines were determined. RESULTS: CRS control classification with and without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control was highly consistent across rhinologists (κw  = 0.758). Rhinologist-assessed CRS control agreed with patient-reported CRS control significantly better when rhinologists had knowledge of patient-reported CRS control (κw  = 0.736 vs. κw  = 0.554, p < 0.001). Patient-reported CRS control, nasal obstruction, drainage, and endoscopy findings were most strongly associated with rhinologists' assessment of CRS control. Rhinologists' CRS control assessments weakly agreed with EPOS CRS control guidelines with (κw  = 0.529) and without (κw  = 0.538) patient-reported CRS control. Rhinologists classified CRS as more controlled than EPOS guidelines in almost 50% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study directly demonstrates the importance of patient-reported CRS control as a dominant influence on rhinologists' CRS control assessment. Knowledge of patient-reported CRS control may better align rhinologists' CRS control assessments and treatment decisions with patients' perspectives.

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.

Avoiding bias in artificial intelligence.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is ubiquitous and expanding, and the healthcare industry has rapidly adopted AI and machine learning for numerous applications. It is essential to understand that AI is not immune to the biases that impact our clinical and academic work, and in fact may inadvertently amplify rather than reduce them. As we harness the power of AI, it is our obligation to our patients to ensure that we address these concerns. We must take responsibility for proactive stewardship to protect against bias, not only for new AI algorithms, but also for our research studies that may one day provide data for those algorithms.

Symptom Localization May Differentiate Subtypes of Eustachian Tube Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive ability of symptom self-localization to distinguish obstructive eustachian tube dysfunction from non-obstructive salpingitis. METHODS: Adult (age ≥18 years) patients with a primary complaint of aural discomfort who underwent diagnostic nasal endoscopy and tympanometry at a tertiary academic center were enrolled. Symptoms were self-localized by using a single finger on the affected side. All patients completed the 7-item Eustachian Tube Dysfunction Questionnaire (ETDQ-7) and underwent scoring of eustachian tube inflammation using the Endoscopic Evaluation of the Eustachian Tube (3ET) system. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were included in the study. Symptoms were localized to the external auditory canal (EAC) in 28 (38.4%), to the infratemporal fossa (ITF) below the lobule in 37 (50.7%), and to the preauricular region in 8 (11.0%). Demographics and medical history were similar between groups. The EAC group had significantly more negative tympanometric peak pressure (TPP) (median, -92.0 daPa; IQR, 95.5) and higher 3ET scores. In contrast, the ITF group had normal TPP (median, -2.0 daPa; IQR, 7.0) and higher 3ET scores. The preauricular group was more likely to have temporomandibular joint or pterygoid muscle pain. ETDQ-7 scores did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Symptom localization is associated with specific objective findings in the evaluation of aural discomfort. Patients with pain localizing to the ITF are more likely to have findings of eustachian tube salpingitis without obstruction whereas patients with symptoms deep in the EAC are more likely to have findings consistent with obstructive eustachian tube dysfunction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:1818-1823, 2023.

Economic Viability of Penicillin Allergy Testing to Avoid Improper Clindamycin Surgical Prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients mislabeled with a penicillin allergy are often unnecessarily given prophylactic clindamycin. Thus, otolaryngologists may cause harm due to clindamycin's associated risk of Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) and surgical site infections (SSI). The objective of this study was to determine the economic feasibility of penicillin allergy testing in preventing unnecessary clindamycin use among patients with an unconfirmed penicillin allergy prior to otolaryngologic surgery. METHODS: A break-even analysis was performed using the average cost of penicillin allergy testing and a CDI/SSI to calculate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) in baseline CDI/SSI rate due to clindamycin required for penicillin testing to be economically sustainable. The binomial distribution was used to calculate the probability that current penicillin testing can achieve this study's ARR. RESULTS: Preoperative penicillin testing was found to be economically sustainable if it could decrease the baseline CDI rate by an ARR of 1.06% or decrease the baseline SSI rate by an ARR of 1.34%. The probability of penicillin testing achieving these ARRs depended on the baseline CDI and SSI rates. When the CDI rate was at least 5% or the SSI rate was at least 7%, penicillin allergy testing was guaranteed to achieve economic sustainability. CONCLUSION: In patients mislabeled with a penicillin allergy, preoperative penicillin allergy testing may be an economically sustainable option to prevent the unnecessary use of prophylactic clindamycin during otolaryngologic surgery. Current practice guidelines should be modified to recommend penicillin allergy testing in patients with an unconfirmed allergy prior to surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 133:1086-1091, 2023.

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.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols for Head and Neck Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to optimize the pre-, intra-, and postoperative care of patients to improve surgery outcomes, reduce complications, decrease length of stay, and more. We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of ERAS protocols for head and neck cancer surgery with or without microvascular reconstruction. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were queried, and abstracts were screened independently by 2 investigators. REVIEW METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We included comparative observational studies but excluded animal studies, case reports, and case series. RESULTS: Of 557 articles initially reviewed by title and/or abstract, we identified 30 for full-text screening, and 9 met the criteria for qualitative synthesis. Meta-analysis of length of stay revealed a mean decrease of 1.37 days (95% CI, 0.77-1.96; I2 = 0%; P < .00001) with the ERAS group as compared with non-ERAS controls. The standardized mean difference of the morphine milligram equivalent was 0.72 lower (95% CI, 0.26-1.18; I2 = 82%; P = .002) in the ERAS group vs controls. The quality of studies was moderate with a median MINORS score of 18.5 (range, 13.5-21.5). CONCLUSION: Implementation of ERAS protocols can lead to decreases in length of stay and opioid drug utilization. However, further high-quality prospective studies of ERAS protocols are needed, especially with stratified analysis of outcomes based on the type of head and neck cancer surgery.

Systemic Steroids for Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Disorders: An Evidence-Based Primer for Clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed guidance on the use of systemic corticosteroids (SCS) for common otolaryngologic disorders. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation clinical practice guidelines. REVIEW METHODS: A comprehensive search of published literature through November 2021 was conducted on the efficacy of SCS, alone or in combination with other treatments, for managing disorders in otolaryngology and the subdisciplines. Clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials, when available, were preferentially retrieved. Interventions and outcomes of SCS use were compiled to generate summary tables and narrative synthesis of findings. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the effectiveness of SCS varies widely across otolaryngology disorders. High-level evidence supports SCS use for Bell's palsy, sinonasal polyposis, and lower airway disease. Conversely, evidence is weak or absent for upper respiratory tract infection, eustachian tube dysfunction, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, adenotonsillar hypertrophy, or nonallergic rhinitis. Evidence is indeterminate for acute laryngitis, acute pharyngitis, acute sinusitis, angioedema, chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps, Ménière's disease, postviral olfactory loss, postoperative nerve paresis/paralysis, facial pain, and sudden sensorineural hearing loss. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Clinicians should bring an evidence-informed lens to SCS prescribing to best counsel patients regarding the risks, anticipated benefits, and limited data on long-term effects. Alternate routes of corticosteroid administration-such as sprays, drops, inhalers, and intralesional injections-may be preferable for many disorders, particularly those that are self-limited or require a prolonged duration of therapy. Prudent use of SCS reduces the risk of medication-related adverse effects. Clinicians who are conversant with high-level evidence can achieve optimal outcomes and stewardship when prescribing SCS.

Increased Prevalence of Eosinophilic Esophagitis in Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) are immune-mediated inflammatory conditions that share common histopathologic features. Once considered two separate pathologies, preliminary data has suggested that a higher prevalence of EoE may exist in patients with CRS. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to expand the base of evidence across geographic regions and investigate the association between EoE and CRS, including CRS with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP). METHODS: Quantitative data detailing the prevalence of CRS, CRSwNP, and EoE were pooled from 6 large academic institutions spread across the United States using Epic electronic medical record system. One-way analysis of variance was then used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The mean prevalence of EoE in our general population sample of over 26 million individual records was 0.058% (range, 0.013%-0.103%). The mean prevalence of EoE in our sub-populations of individual with diagnoses of CRS and CRSwNP was 0.43% (F(1,12) = [8.194], P = .01) and 0.84% (F(1,12) = [23.61], P < .01) respectively. CONCLUSION: This study reveals an 8-fold greater prevalence of concurrent EoE in patients with CRS. Importantly, this is the first study to describe the association of EoE and the CRSwNP subtype, and we demonstrate a 14-fold greater prevalence of EoE in patients with CRSwNP.

Opioid Use After Elective Otolaryngologic Surgery at a Teaching Institution.

Background: Awareness of the opioid epidemic is promoting opioid stewardship in health care. For many commonly performed procedures in general surgery and gynecology, regimented opioid prescribing practices and/or multimodal nonopioid regimens are adequate for optimizing pain management and minimizing opioid dependence. We investigated opioid prescribing patterns for otolaryngology procedures at a tertiary hospital with the aim of characterizing postoperative pain and opioid use. Methods: This cross-sectional study with a patient survey was conducted in a tertiary care academic otolaryngology practice. Patients ≥18 years who underwent 1 of 41 common surgical procedures at an academic hospital between 2013 and 2017 were enrolled. Patients with any diagnosis of malignancy were excluded. Patients were analyzed according to surgery type (rhinoplasty, sinonasal surgery, tonsillectomy, parotidectomy, thyroidectomy, otologic surgery, and laryngoscopy), and those who had surgery in 2017 were surveyed via telephone interview using a standardized questionnaire. Results: A total of 3,152 patients met the study criteria, of whom 95.7% received an opioid prescription. Commonly prescribed opioid agents were hydrocodone-acetaminophen, oxycodone-acetaminophen, and acetaminophen-codeine. A median of 30 pills was prescribed per surgery, with little variation between different surgery types. Reported patient utilization was highest for parotid surgery and tonsillectomy and lowest for laryngoscopic, thyroid, and otologic surgery. Among all patients who received a prescription for opioids, 5.8% required a refill. Among the surveyed patients, 19.6% reported that they did not obtain the prescribed opioid, while 58.4% said they took half, less than half, or none of the prescribed opioid supply. Only 10.8% of surveyed patients disposed of the excess drugs in a recommended fashion. Conclusion: Our findings showed that the quantity of opioid prescriptions does not reflect actual patient analgesic use for elective surgeries in otolaryngology. Differential analgesic requirements for specific surgeries should be considered when prescribing postoperative analgesia.

Advanced Computed Tomographic Localization Techniques for Primary Hyperparathyroidism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Emerging computed tomographic (CT) imaging techniques for the localization of primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) may be superior to the current imaging standard, thus necessitating a critical review and pooling of available evidence. Objective: Primary hyperparathyroidism requires accurate imaging to guide definitive surgical management. Advanced techniques including 4-dimensional computed tomographic (4D-CT) scan have been investigated over the past decade. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of these emerging imaging techniques through pooled analysis of the existing evidence. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were queried for original English articles without any restrictions on date. Study Selection: We included comparative observational studies but excluded animal studies, case reports, and case series. Overall, 353 abstracts were screened independently by 2 investigators along with a third reviewer to resolve conflicts. A total of 26 full-text articles were included in this review. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data was independently extracted by 2 investigators and subsequently pooled into a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Measures of imaging diagnostic performance such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were the primary outcomes of interest. Results: Overall, of 34 articles screened, 26 met criteria for qualitative synthesis, and 23 of these were appropriate for meta-analysis. Of the 26 studies included, there were 5845 patients, of which 4176 were women (79.2%). The average of mean ages reported in 23 studies was 60.9 years. Meta-analysis in all patients with PHPT revealed pooled sensitivity that was greater with 4D-CT (81%; 95% CI, 77%-84%; I2 = 88%) compared with the current first-line modality of sestamibi-single-photon emission CT (SPECT/CT) (65%; 95% CI, 59%-70%; I2 = 93%). For patients with recurrent PHPT requiring reoperation, 4D-CT pooled sensitivity was 81% (95% CI, 64%-98%; I2 = 93%) in contrast to 53% (95% CI, 35%-71%; I2 = 81%) for sestamibi-SPECT/CT. The overall quality of the 26 studies was moderate with a median (range) Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies score for all included studies of 15.5 (13-19). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review and with meta-analyses of numerous studies from the past decade suggest that the 4D-CT can be more sensitive and specific than sestamibi-SPECT/CT in localizing PHPT. More research is needed to determine the clinical significance of this improvement in localization.

Surgical repair of nasal septal perforations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A wide variety of techniques for the surgical repair of nasal septal perforations (NSPs) have been described. Surgical management of NSPs can be broadly divided into open versus endonasal approaches, with additional variables involving unilateral or bilateral flaps, use of grafts, and placement of splints. The objective of this study was to compare surgical approaches and their outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus databases were examined for patients undergoing NSP repair. English-language studies reporting surgical management of patients with the primary diagnosis of NSP were included. Outcome measures of interest included perforation size, surgical approach characteristics, and success rate defined as complete closure assessed by surgeon postoperatively. The quality of articles was assessed with the methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) criteria. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled proportions for the different outcomes. RESULTS: The electronic database search yielded 1076 abstracts for review. A total of 64 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 1591 patients: 1127 (71%) underwent an endonasal approach and 464 (29%) an open approach. The median (range) MINORS score was 10 (5-12) out of 16 points. Overall, 91% of patients had total closure (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.93, p < 0.01), with moderate heterogeneity between studies (I2  = 42.03%). There was no difference in closure success between open and endonasal approaches. Use of bilateral versus unilateral flaps, interposition grafts, and intranasal splints and packing were not associated with differences in outcomes. CONCLUSION: Nasal septal perforation surgical repair success rates are comparable regardless of technique.

Efficacy and safety of balloon dilation of eustachian tube in children: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Eustachian tube dysfunction is a common condition that may lead to otitis media with effusion, hearing loss and developmental delays in children. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of balloon dilation of the eustachian tube (BDET) in the pediatric population. DATA SOURCES: Original studies of BDET in a pediatric population were identified in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, Clinicaltrials.gov and CINAHL. METHODS: Outcomes of efficacy included audiometric findings and adverse events were summarized for each study. RESULTS: Seven articles were included involving 408 children with a mean age of 9.9 years old (95%CI 8.8, 11.1) and a mean follow up of 19.2 months (95%CI 15, 23). Type B tympanograms decreased after BDET from 64.2% (95%CI 53.3, 73.8) to 16.1% (95%CI 8.5, 28.4). Air-bone gap (ABG) decreased after BDET from a mean of 25.3 dB (95%CI 18.9, 31.6) to 10.2 dB (95%CI 8.9, 11.5). The pooled estimate of adverse events after BDET was 5.1% (95%CI 3.2, 8.1), the majority being self-limited epistaxis with no major adverse events reported. Three studies compared BDET to ventilation tube insertion; analysis of post-operative ABG showed a greater decrease in the BDET group (mean difference -6.4 dB; 95%CI -9.8, -3.1; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Although there are no prospective randomized control trials, BDET ± tympanostomy tube placement may produce outcomes that are comparable to tympanostomy tube placement in the treatment of otitis media with effusion in the pediatric population. Most children undergoing the procedure are those with recalcitrant disease. The procedure is safe with the most common complication being epistaxis.

Lesser Known Uses of γ-Aminobutyric Acid Analogue Medications in Otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: In otolaryngology, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) analogues have been previously analyzed for their roles in neuropathic pain, chronic cough, tinnitus, and perioperative analgesia. The primary aim of this study is to comprehensively summarize and synthesize the existing evidence for lesser known uses of gabapentin and pregabalin in otolaryngology. STUDY DESIGN: A scoping review conducted of the available English-language literature was performed by two authors through April 1, 2021. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis criteria were followed, and a quality assessment of included studies was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. RESULTS: Ten studies met inclusion criteria. Three studies found that gabapentin may reduce gastrostomy tube usage and improve swallowing function in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT). Three studies suggested that gabapentin may help reduce opiate use when used as a primary analgesic in patients with radiation-induced mucositis. One study demonstrated that pregabalin-reduced trismus severity in patients with radiotherapy-induced trismus. One study demonstrated gabapentin may be useful in patients with phonasthenia. Two studies demonstrated that GABA analogues may be a useful adjunct in patients with globus pharyngeus in the context of likely laryngeal sensory neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: The most promising potential uses for GABA analogues identified in this review are for improving swallowing, trismus, and narcotic overuse after RT. The benefit of GABA analogues for improving nonorganic voice disorders is also promising while the benefit for globus pharyngeus when possibly related to laryngeal sensory neuropathy is inconclusive. Laryngoscope, 132:954-964, 2022.