The Potential Effects of Burn Pit Exposure on the Respiratory Tract: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Burn pits (BPs) have been widely used by the U.S. military for waste disposal while in conflicts abroad. Significant adverse health effects are thought to be linked to BPs, but limited data exist examining the impact on the respiratory tract. The purpose of this systematic review is to characterize these effects on both the upper respiratory tract (URT) and lower respiratory tract (LRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines on articles published from January 1, 2001, through November 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were queried for studies examining the effect of BPs on the URT and LRT of service members.

RESULTS

A total of 288 articles were identified, with nine meeting inclusion criteria. Eight of the nine articles assessed the LRT, one examined the URT alone, and two examined both the URT and LRT. Outcome measures were heterogeneous across all studies, precluding meta-analysis. Patient-reported LRT diagnoses appeared to increase as exposure to BPs increased. There are very limited data assessing the impact of BP exposure on the URT. No association between BP exposure and objective measures of LRT or URT disease was identified.

CONCLUSION

Service members deployed to combat zones seem to report a significant increase in respiratory diseases following exposure to BPs, although definitive conclusions are limited by multiple airborne exposures and varied reporting methods. Self-reported LRT diagnoses appear to be more prevalent. There is a paucity of data on the effects of BPs on the URT. Objective measures of disease do not appear to correlate with patient reports. Prospective, long-term, and outcome-based studies are necessary to examine the effects of BPs, and other airborne hazards related to deployment, on the URT and LRT of service members.

Patient and Provider Satisfaction With Telemedicine in Otolaryngology

Objective

The objective of this study is to evaluate patient and provider satisfaction with telemedicine encounters across 3 otolaryngology practices.

Study Design

Cross-sectional survey.

Setting

A military community hospital, an academic military hospital, and a nonmilitary academic center.

Methods

A telephone-based survey of patients undergoing telemedicine encounters for routine otolaryngology appointments was performed between April and July 2020. Patients were asked about their satisfaction, the factors affecting care, and demographic information. A provider survey was emailed to staff otolaryngologists. The survey asked about satisfaction, concerns for reimbursement or liability, encounters best suited for telemedicine, and demographic information. The results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a multivariable logistic linear regression model to determine odds ratios.

Results

A total of 325 patients were surveyed, demonstrating high satisfaction with telemedicine (average score, 4.49 of 5 [best possible answer]). Patients perceived “no negative impact” or “minor negative impact” on the encounter due to the lack of a physical examination or face-to-face interaction (1.86 and 1.95 of 5, respectively). High satisfaction was consistent across groups for distance to travel, age, and reason for referral. A total of 25 providers were surveyed, with an average satisfaction score of 3.44 of 5. Providers reported “slight” to “somewhat” concern about reimbursement (40%) and liability (32%).

Conclusion

Given patients’ and providers’ levels of satisfaction, there is likely a role for telemedicine in otolaryngology practice that may benefit patient care independent of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Dizzying Complaint: Investigating the Intended Meaning of Dizziness Among Patients and Providers

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

To assess for semantic differences regarding the definition of dizziness among otolaryngology patients, otolaryngologists, and non-otolaryngologist providers.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

Between March and May 2020, a survey consisting of 20 common descriptors for dizziness within five domains (lightheadedness, motion sensitivity, imbalance, vision complaints, and pain) was completed by patients at two outpatient otolaryngology clinics. Surveys were subsequently obtained from otolaryngology and non-otolaryngology providers attending a multidisciplinary dizziness lecture. The primary outcome measure was to assess for differences in definition of dizziness between patients and providers. Secondary outcome measures included assessing differences between otolaryngologists and non-otolaryngologists.

RESULTS

About 221 patients and 100 providers participated. Patients selected a median of 7 terms compared to 8 for providers (P = .375), although providers had a larger overall distribution of number of terms selected (P = .038). Patients were more likely than providers to define dizziness according to the following domains: lightheadedness (difference 15.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.5%-25.3%), vision complaints (difference 21.6%, 95% CI 12.0%-29.6%), and pain (difference 11.5%, 95% CI 4.7%-17.1%). Providers were more likely to define dizziness according to the motion sensitivity domain (difference 13.8%, 95% CI 6.8%-19.6%). Otolaryngology and non-otolaryngology providers defined dizziness similarly across symptom domains.

CONCLUSION

Although patients and providers both view dizziness as imbalance, patients more commonly describe dizziness in the context of lightheadedness, vision complaints, and pain, whereas providers more frequently define dizziness according to motion sensitivity. These semantic differences create an additional barrier to effective patient-provider communication.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 131:E1443-E1449, 2021.

COVID-19 Airway Management Isolation Chamber

Objective

During the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), health care workers are innovating patient care and safety measures. Unfortunately, many of these are not properly tested for efficacy. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of the novel COVID-19 Airway Management Isolation Chamber (CAMIC) to contain and evacuate particulate.

Study Design

Multi-institutional proof-of-concept study.

Setting

Two academic institutions: Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) and Madigan Army Medical Center (MAMC).

Subjects and Methods

Smoke, saline nebulizer, and simulated working port models were developed to assess the efficacy of the CAMIC to contain and remove ultrafine particles. Particulate counts were collected at set time intervals inside and outside the system.

Results

With the CAMIC on, smoke particulate counts inside the chamber significantly decreased over time: r(18) = −0.88, P < .001, WRNMMC; r(18) = −0.91, P < .001, MAMC. Similarly, saline nebulizer particulate counts inside the chamber significantly decreased over time: r(23) = −0.82, P < .001, WRNMMC; r(23) = −0.70, P < .001, MAMC. In the working port model, particulate counts inside the chamber significantly decreased over time: r(23) = −0.95, P < .001, WRNMMC; r(23) = −0.85, P < .001, MAMC. No significant leak was detected in the smoke, saline nebulizer, or working port model when the CAMIC was turned on.

Conclusions

The CAMIC system appears to provide a barrier that actively removes particles from within the chamber and limits egress. Further studies are necessary to determine clinical applicability. The CAMIC may serve as an adjunct to improve health care worker safety and patient outcomes.

Differentiation of Clinical Patterns Associated With Rhinologic Disease

BACKGROUND

Common rhinologic diagnoses have similar presentations with a varying degree of overlap. Patterns may exist within clinical data that can be useful for early diagnosis and predicting outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the feasibility of artificial intelligence to differentiate patterns in patient data in order to develop clinically-meaningful diagnostic groups.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of prospectively-acquired patient data at a tertiary rhinology clinic was performed. Data extracted included objective findings on nasal endoscopy, patient reported quality of life (PRQOL) instrument ratings, peripheral eosinophil fraction, and past medical history. Unsupervised non-hierarchical cluster analysis was performed to discover patterns in the data using 22 input variables.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients were analyzed after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria yielding 7 unique patient clusters, highly dependent on PRQOL scores and demographics. The clusters were clinically-relevant with distinct characteristics. Chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP) was associated with two clusters having low frequencies of asthma and low eosinophil fractions. Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) was associated with high frequency of asthma, mean (standard deviation [SD]) NOSE scores of 66 (19) and SNOT-22 scores of 41 (15), and high eosinophil fractions. AR was present in multiple clusters. RARS was associated with the youngest population with mean (SD) NOSE score of 54 (23) and SNOT-22 score of 41 (19).

CONCLUSION

Broader consideration of initially available clinical data may improve diagnostic efficiency for rhinologic conditions without ancillary studies, using computer-driven algorithms. PRQOL scores and demographic information appeared to be useful adjuncts, with associations to diagnoses in this pilot study.

Opioid prescribing patterns and usage after rhinologic surgery: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Judicious management of analgesics following rhinologic surgery is important for curtailing over-prescription of opioids. Limited data exists defining expected pain levels and appropriate opioid requirements after rhinologic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library databases were queried, and relevant articles were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 405 articles were identified, of which 13 met final inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity existed regarding type and quantity of opioid medication prescribed. Eight studies utilized a subjective patient-reported pain score as an outcome measure and reported mild to moderate postoperative pain that diminished over the first 3-6 days. Eight studies reported over-prescription of opioid medications with inappropriate storage of excess pills at home. Several factors were associated with an increased opioid requirement, including concurrent septoplasty, younger age, and current smoking status.

CONCLUSION

Rhinologic surgery is well tolerated with mild to moderate, short-lived postoperative pain. A limited amount and duration of opioid medications is required for routine management. Patients are frequently prescribed more opioids than is necessary for expected pain level, resulting in the potential for opioid misuse, abuse, and diversion. Current evidence is limited by a predominance of level 4 studies. Larger, higher quality studies with standardized reporting of pain score and opioid prescription quantity are needed.

Prevalence of Eustachian Tube Dysfunction in the US Elderly Population

Objective

To investigate the prevalence of eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) in elderly adults in the United States and its association with other upper aerodigestive inflammatory processes.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Population based.

Subjects and Methods

In total, 147,805 patients without malignancy were compared to 13,804 demographically matched patients with malignancy of the upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) by querying the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)–Medicare linked database for patients aged 66 to 99 years between 2003 and 2011. The prevalence of ETD and inflammatory diseases among these patients was compared. Association between ETD, other upper aerodigestive inflammatory processes, and UADT malignancies was evaluated.

Results

The prevalence of ETD was 5.44% among patients without malignancy and 9.08% in those with cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; 95% CI, 1.63-1.84). Patients with ETD in the control population were more likely (OR, 95% CI) to be diagnosed with chronic rhinitis (5.00, 4.70-5.33), chronic sinusitis (4.20, 3.98-4.43), allergic rhinitis (4.27, 4.08-4.47), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (2.42, 2.31-2.53). Patients with ETD and chronic rhinitis (1.43, 1.24-1.65), chronic sinusitis (1.57, 1.38-1.78), and acute otitis media (1.33, 1.08-1.65) were associated with higher rates of UADT malignancy.

Conclusion

Over 5% of patients older than 65 in the United States are diagnosed with ETD in the absence of UADT malignancy. Associations between ETD and chronic rhinitis, chronic sinusitis, allergic rhinitis, and GERD in the absence of UADT malignancy suggest that some patients may benefit from treatment of inflammatory disease as a cause of ETD.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis)

OBJECTIVE

Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient's quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self-treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one-third of all otolaryngology-related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds. The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures. This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It focuses on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians via phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first-line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients-patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function-are included in this guideline. 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 for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, 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 recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include one or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life-threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first-line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization. The policy level for the following recommendation, about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy, was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis) Executive Summary

OBJECTIVE

Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the great majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient's quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self-treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one-third of all otolaryngology-related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds. The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures. This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It will focus on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians with phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first-line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients, patients with hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT) and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function, are included in this guideline. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the working group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based upon their experience and assessment of individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include 1 or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life-threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first-line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT). (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization. The policy level for the following recommendation about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.

Outcomes and Complications with Topical Epinephrine in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of topical epinephrine in adults undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE online databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Non-case report English articles studying the effects of topical epinephrine as the topical vasoconstrictor used in adult ESS were found from the online databases through January 2019. The PRISMA literature selection process was used (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses).

RESULTS

An overall 2216 articles were identified, with 9 meeting inclusion criteria involving a total of 5043 patients. All 9 studies assessed the safety of topical epinephrine, while 5 examined efficacy. Intraoperative average blood loss (ABL) ranged from 60 to 426 mL. Topical epinephrine concentrations varied from 1:1000 to 1:100,000, and 3 major complications were found for a rate of 0.06%. There were no reports of ophthalmic, orbital, or skull base injury, nor were there reports of cerebrospinal fluid leaks. A meta-analysis was performed on the 4 studies examining ABL. Estimated mean (95% CI) ABL was 119.4 mL (39.1-199.6) in the higher-concentration cohort (>1:10,000) and 372.2 mL (296.8-447.5) in the lower-concentration cohort (≤1:10,000) (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Topical epinephrine is generally safe and provides acceptable hemostasis during ESS, with higher concentrations (>1:10,000) providing improved hemostasis. Caution is advised for its use in patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease or in combination with other topical or injected vasoconstrictive agents. More prospective comparative studies are necessary to determine the ideal hemostatic concentration of epinephrine in ESS.

Pediatric sinonasal and skull base lesions

Pediatric skull base lesions are complex and challenging disorders. Safe and comprehensive management of this diverse group of disorders requires the expertise of an experienced multidisciplinary skull base team. Adult endoscopic skull base surgery has evolved due to technologic and surgical advancements, multidisciplinary team approaches, and continued innovation. Similar principles continue to advance the care delivered to the pediatric population. The approach and management of these lesions varies considerably based on tumor anatomy, pathology, and surgical goals. An understanding of the nuances of skull base reconstruction unique to the pediatric population is critical for successful outcomes.

Association Between Age and Weight as Risk Factors for Complication After Tonsillectomy in Healthy Children

Importance

The 1996 Tonsillectomy and Adenoidectomy Inpatient Guidelines of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) Pediatric Otolaryngology Committee recommended that children younger than 3 years be admitted following tonsillectomy. Recommendations for hospital observation were not included as a key action statement in the 2011 AAO-HNS Clinical Practice Guidelines for Tonsillectomy in Children.

Objective

To examine the association between posttonsillectomy complication rate and the age and weight of the child at the time of surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a multicenter case series study with medical record review of 2139 consecutive children ages 3 to 6 years who underwent tonsillectomy at 1 tertiary care academic center and 5 acute care centers in New Orleans, Louisiana, between 2005 and 2015. Children with moderate to severe developmental delay, bleeding disorders, and other major medical comorbidities were excluded.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Complications examined included respiratory distress, dehydration requiring intravenous fluids, and bleeding.

Results

Of the 2139 patients, 1817 met inclusion criteria. A total of 1011 (55.6%) were male. The mean (SD) age at the time of the procedure was 46 (14) months (range, 12-72 months). The mean weight at the time of the procedure was 17 (5) kg (range, 9-43 kg). A total of 95 patients (5.2%) had a postoperative complication. Of the 455 children younger than 3 years in the study, 32 (7.0%) had complications compared with 63 (4.6%) of the 1362 patients 3 years or older. The odds of having a complication in children younger than 3 years was 1.5 times greater than it was in children 3 years or older (odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.00-2.42). When examining total complications, children younger than 3 years were more likely to experience a complication within the first 24 hours after surgery than children 3 years or older (25% vs 9.5%; OR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.00-10.11). The children admitted to the hospital had a greater risk of complication than those treated as an outpatient, independent of age (6.9% vs 93.0%; OR, 3.49; 95% CI, 2.0.18-6.05). No association between weight and complications was found on logistic regression (area under the curve = 0.5268; P = .66).

Conclusions and Relevance

Healthy children younger than 3 years may be at an increased risk for complication following tonsillectomy. Those children may also be at increased risk for complications within the first 24 hours after surgery compared with children 3 years or older. Our data suggest that complications are independent of weight in these patients. In our cohort, those patients selected for overnight observation were associated with an increased number of adverse events following tonsillectomy, suggesting that clinician judgment is crucial in determining which patients are safe for outpatient tonsillectomy.

Association of Gastroesophageal Reflux With Malignancy of the Upper Aerodigestive Tract in Elderly Patients

Importance

Chronic inflammatory states have been linked to the development of malignancy. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a known risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma as the end result of chronic inflammatory changes.

Objective

To investigate the association of GERD with the risk of malignancy in the upper aerodigestive tract (UADT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database to conduct a case-control study of individuals in the United States who had been added from January 2003 through December 2011 and were 66 years or older. The study included patients diagnosed with malignancy of the larynx, hypopharynx, oropharynx, tonsil, nasopharynx, and paranasal sinuses. GERD was examined as an exposure. Controls were matched from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries without cancer. Multivariable unconditional logistic regression was performed.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incidence of invasive malignancies of the UADT.

Results

A total of 13 805 patients (median [range] age, 74 [66-99] years; 3418 women [24.76%] and 10 387 men [75.24%]) with malignancy of the UADT were compared with 13 805 patients without disease and were matched for sex, age group, and year of diagnosis. GERD was associated with a greater odds of developing malignancy of the larynx (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.86; 95% CI, 2.65-3.09), hypopharynx (aOR, 2.54; 95% CI 1.97-3.29), oropharynx (aOR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.90-3.23), tonsil (aOR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.82-2.53), nasopharynx (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.56-2.66), and paranasal sinuses (aOR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.70).

Conclusions and Relevance

GERD is associated with the presence of malignancy of the UADT in the US elderly population. This epidemiological association requires further examination to determine causality and diagnostic utility.

Adherus Dural Sealant in Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery: Safety, Imaging Characteristics, and Sinonasal Quality of Life

Objective  This study was aimed to compare the safety profiles, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, and sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) scores of Adherus dural sealant, a novel tissue glue designed for skull base surgery. Design  Present study is a prospective case series. Setting  The research work took place at a tertiary-care academic medical center. Participants  Consecutive series of 26 patients undergoing endoscopic skull base surgery (ESBS) with Adherus was compared with a control group of 24 patients matched for tumor type and size with DuraSeal as a sealant. Main Outcome Measures  Postoperative complication rates, imaging characteristics, and postoperative SNOT-22 scores were measured and compared. Results  No postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks, intracranial hemorrhages, or mucoceles were observed in either cohort. Adherus was more likely to be identifiable on immediate postoperative MRI (50 vs. 20.8%, p  = 0.032). In patients in whom a nasoseptal flap was utilized, the flap was opposed to the skull base in all cases regardless of sealant selected. Postoperative SNOT-22 total (17.25 [±10.81] vs. 14.85 [±14.22], p  = 0.609) and subdomain scores were similar between the two groups. Conclusions  Adherus dural sealant appears to be a safe alternative to Duraseal in ESBS with comparable quality of life outcomes and imaging findings. These preliminary results are promising but should be examined in a larger population with long-term follow-up.

Intra-operative MRI vs endoscopy in achieving gross total resection of pituitary adenomas: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) is a technology that may improve rates of gross total resection (GTR) for pituitary adenomas. The endoscope is another less expensive technology, which also may maximize resection rates. A direct comparison of these approaches and their additive benefit has never been performed.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) standard. PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies that examined GTR for pituitary adenoma resection with either endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (eTSS), microscopic transsphenoidal surgery with iMRI (mTSS + iMRI), or endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery with iMRI (eTSS + iMRI).

RESULTS

Eighty-five studies that reported GTR rates in 7124 pituitary adenoma patients were identified. For all pituitary adenomas, eTSS had a pooled proportion of GTR of 68.9% (95% CI 64.7-73.0%) which was similar to that of mTSS + iMRI (GTR 68.3%; 95% CI = 59.4-76.5%) and eTSS + iMRI (GTR 70.7%; 95% CI = 56.9-89.6%). For the subgroup of pituitary macroadenomas, pooled proportions for GTR were similar between eTSS and mTSS + iMRI (eTSS: GTR 59.4%; 95% CI = 49.6-68.7% vs mTSS + iMRI: GTR 68.8%; 95% CI = 57.3-79.3%), and higher for eTSS + iMRI (81.1%; 95% CI = 75.5-86.2%). The post-operative CSF leak proportion for eTSS (4.7%; 95% CI = 3.6-5.9%) was similar to that for eTSS + iMRI (3.7%; 95% CI = 1.6-6.5%) and mTSS + iMRI (4.6%; 95% CI = 2.0-8.3%). No direct statistical comparisons could be performed.

CONCLUSION

Final GTR proportions are similar whether the surgeon uses a microscope supplemented with iMRI or endoscope with or without iMRI. The benefit of the two technologies may be complementary for macroadenomas. These findings are important to consider when comparing the efficacy of different technical strategies in the management of pituitary adenomas.

The Unified Airway: Does Asthma Influence Paranasal Sinus Pneumatization?

Asthma has been implicated as a driving force in lower airway remodeling; however, its effect on upper airway development has not been studied. Clinical disease, particularly cystic fibrosis (CF), has been associated with anatomical paranasal sinus variation, although the mechanism for these variations remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine whether asthma is associated with altered sinus pneumatization. Five hundred ninety-one computed tomography scans, including 303 adolescents (age 13-18) and 288 adults (age > 18), were evaluated using the Assessment of Pneumatization of the Paranasal Sinuses (APPS) instrument. The APPS score is validated for assessing anatomical variation and total sinus volume. A diagnosis of asthma was ascertained from the medical record, and patients with CF were included as a positive control group. Patients with asthma had mean APPS score of 9.66, compared to 9.85 for participants without asthma (P = .585). Subgroup analysis demonstrated similar findings among adults (P = .817) and adolescents (P = .585). Patients with a diagnosis of CF had significant sinus hypoplasia according to a mean APPS scores of 3.50 (P < .001). Sinus hypoplasia persisted in both adults (P < .001) and adolescents (P < .001) with CF. The presence of asthma is not associated with altered paranasal sinus pneumatization. In contrast, CF is associated with significantly reduced sinus pneumatization. These findings suggest that aberrant sinus pneumatization may not be a feature of asthma and that chronic mucosal respiratory disease is not a generalizable cause for altered paranasal sinus pneumatization.

Early Versus Late Computed Tomography and Nasal Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Nasopharyngeal and Paranasal Sinus Malignancy

Background

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and allergic rhinitis (AR) may be associated with an increased risk of subsequent diagnosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) or paranasal sinus cancer (PSC) in elderly Americans. The clinical utility of this association remains uncertain.

Objective

To compare early computed tomography (CT) or nasal endoscopy (NE) with late diagnostic studies for the diagnosis of NPC or PSC in elderly Americans with CRS or AR.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database was queried from 2003 to 2011 and included 150 088 Medicare beneficiaries. Patients with a diagnosis of CRS or AR were examined for either NE or CT performed within 6 months of the exposure diagnosis. The risk of a cancer diagnosis was determined between the early and the late diagnostic groups.

Results

The relative risk of early cancer diagnosis with NE was 1.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60–2.43). The number needed to detect (NND) a case of cancer with NE was 503 (95% CI, 387–718). The relative risk of an early cancer diagnosis using CT was 3.40 (95% CI, 2.85–4.06) and NND was 221 (95% CI, 194–255). The stage of NPC or PSC for the late diagnostic group was not different from those with early NE ( P = .458) or CT ( P = .497). Overall survival was not different between diagnostic groups for NE ( P = .789) or CT ( P = .425).

Conclusions

Early NE or CT is associated with a higher likelihood of cancer diagnosis in elderly individuals with a diagnosis of CRS or AR. The clinical utility of this association is limited due to the low prevalence of these malignancies and lack of difference in disease stage and overall survival between diagnostic groups.

Epistaxis Risk Associated with Intranasal Corticosteroid Sprays: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

Intranasal corticosteroids (INCSs) are widely utilized for the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Epistaxis is a known adverse effect of INCSs, but it is not known if the risk of epistaxis differs among INCSs.

Data Sources

Systematic review of primary studies identified through Medline, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed Central, and Cochrane databases.

Review Methods

Systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA standard. English-language studies were queried through February 1, 2018. The search identified randomized controlled trials of INCSs for treatment of allergic rhinitis that reported incidence of epistaxis. An itemized assessment of the risk of bias was conducted for each included study, and meta-analysis was performed of the relative risk of epistaxis for each INCS.

Results

Of 949 identified studies, 72 met the criteria for analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated an overall relative risk of epistaxis of 1.48 (95% CI, 1.32-1.67) for all INCSs. The INCSs associated with the highest risk of epistaxis were beclomethasone hydrofluoroalkane, fluticasone furoate, mometasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate. Beclomethasone aqueous, ciclesonide hydrofluoroalkane, and ciclesonide aqueous were associated with the lowest risk of epistaxis. Conclusions about epistaxis with use of budesonide, triamcinolone, and flunisolide are limited due to the low number of studies and high heterogeneity.

Conclusions

While a differential effect on epistaxis among INCS agents is not clearly demonstrated, this meta-analysis does confirm an increased risk of epistaxis for patients using INCSs as compared with placebo for treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Detection of laryngeal carcinoma in the U.S. elderly population with gastroesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

An association is suggested between gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and malignancy of the larynx in elderly patients in the United States. Early detection with flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FFL) or CT remains poorly defined.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database was queried from 2003 to 2011.A case-cohort design evaluated patients aged 66 and older with a diagnosis of GERD and/or LPR for the occurrence of FFL or CT within 6 months of the exposure diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of a total 156 426 Medicare beneficiaries, the relative risk of early cancer diagnosis with FFL was 14.61(95% confidence interval [CI], 13.59-15.70), corresponding to a number needed to detect (NND) a case of cancer of 13(95% CI, 13-14). The relative risk of an early cancer diagnosis with CT was 31.83 (95% CI, 29.57-34.26), with a NND of 5 (95% CI, 5-5).

CONCLUSIONS

Early FFL and CT are associated with a higher likelihood of laryngeal cancer diagnosis in elderly individuals with a diagnosis of reflux. Screening trials are necessary to establish this relationship.