Equivalence in outcomes between Draf 2B vs Draf 3 frontal sinusotomy for refractory chronic frontal rhinosinusitis

Extent of Endoscopic Sinus Surgery in Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is an incomplete understanding regarding the extent of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in managing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and its effect on outcomes. This study aimed to assess and compare limited sinus surgery, full-house, extended and radical ESS for optimizing CRS outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

An online search in adherence with PRISMA guidelines was performed. Data were pooled for meta-analysis. Forty-six articles met inclusion criteria. Full-house ESS yielded greater improvements in SNOT-22 and endoscopy scores over limited ESS. Radical ESS improved nasal symptoms and reduced disease recurrence more than full house ESS, while extended ESS decreased revision ESS rates when compared to full-house ESS. Total ethmoidectomy reduced SNOT-22 scores more than limited ethmoidectomy. There was no difference in perioperative complications for all extents of ESS. When compared to limited ESS, full-house ESS yielded better patient symptom outcomes. Radical ESS demonstrated even greater reductions in nasal symptoms, while extended ESS additionally decreased revision surgery rates. Thus, in general, greater extent of ESS leads to better outcomes, while all extents of ESS are relatively safe.

Clinical features, operative management and surgical results of first Draf III procedure, revision Draf III approach and the use of mucosal flaps and stents: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Draf III procedure is a challenging endoscopic technique, which has gradually gained an increasing popularity in treating frontal sinus pathologies. The main aim of this systematic review is to offer a comprehensive overview on clinical indications, pre-operative evaluation, surgical techniques, post-operative management and complications of the Draf III procedure. As a step forward, such issues have been comparatively evaluated as referred to patients who underwent primary Draf III procedure and revision DRAF III one). Finally, surgical outcomes related to mucosal flaps and stents to prevent re-stenosis are analyzed.

METHODS

A systematic literature review has been performed following PRISMA 2020 checklist statement. An automated search has been carried out by applying an extensive set of queries on the Embase/PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases, relating to papers published from 2000 to 2021.

RESULTS

Frontal chronic refractory sinusitis is the most frequent indication to Draf III procedure (72%), followed by mucoceles (11%) and skull base or paranasal tumors (10%). The success rate of primary and revision Draf III are 83.5% and 71%, respectively. The re-stenosis phenomenon seems to depend on allergic mechanism and polyposis). The use of mucosal flaps could improve the Draf III efficacy, better than the use of stents (87 vs 72% of neo-ostium patency).

CONCLUSION

Draf III is a safe and highly effective surgical technique. However, some limited clinical conditions require some careful technical features, such as the use of mucosal flap, in order to prevent re-stenosis.

The Impact of the Nasal Mucosal Flap on Tissue Remodeling After Sinus Bone Drilling in Rabbit Models

BACKGROUND

Frontal sinus surgery remained a challenge of restenosis or obliteration of the drainage pathway caused by the scarring and neo-osteogenesis after mucosal stripping and bone drill-out. The pedicled or free nasal mucosal flap is typically used to repair the exposed bone surface to avoid or reduce recurrence.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the histopathological mechanism of mucosal flaps repairing bare bone after mucosal resection and bone drill-out in the rabbit model.

METHODS

Thirty New Zealand white rabbits were used. Sixteen rabbits were selected as the experimental group, and Staphylococcus aureus was used to establish the CRS model (CRS group). Fourteen healthy rabbits were allocated to the control group (NCRS group). Each group was divided into two subgroups with or without mucosal flap repair (CRS-FLAP, CRS-NFLAP, NCRS-FLAP, and NCRS-NFLAP, respectively). The bony anterior and lateral walls of the maxillary sinus of each rabbit were abraded by the drill. The bare bone was then covered with a flap in FLAP subgroups. Bone remodeling and mucosal morphological changes were observed and compared by histopathological hematoxylin and eosin and Masson staining.

RESULTS

In the CRS-NFLAP subgroup, the regenerated epithelium lacked typical structure, accompanied by numerous inflammatory cell infiltration and collagen deposition. Conversely, the inflammatory reaction was mild in the CRS-FLAP subgroup, and there was less collagen deposition. The restored mucosal structure was like the normal mucosa. The epithelium in the NCRS-NFLAP subgroup was partially exfoliated, with few cilia, goblet cells, and glandular structures. Compared with the NCRS-NFLAP subgroup, the CRS-NFLAP subgroup showed significant bone remodeling with enhanced activity of osteoblast and osteoclast cells.

CONCLUSIONS

Pedicled mucosal flap repair could significantly reduce local mucosal and bone remodeling in a rabbit model of CRS.

Advances in Sinus Surgery for Nasal Polyps

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is comprised of a diverse group of endotypes that cause significant morbidity for afflicted patients. While endoscopic sinus surgery helps ameliorate the disease, polyps frequently recur. Newer strategies are intended to provide access for topical steroid irrigations in attempts to improve the disease process and quality of life, and decrease overall recurrence of polyps.

OBJECTIVE

To review the current literature examining the latest surgical approaches for CRSwNP.

METHODS

Review article.

RESULTS

In dealing with the recalcitrant nature of CRSwNP, surgical techniques have simultaneously become more nuanced and aggressive. Bony resection in anatomically unfavorable areas such as the frontal, maxillary, and sphenoid outflow regions, replacing diseased or denuded mucosa with healthy grafts or flaps at the neo-ostia, and introducing drug-eluting biomaterials to newly opened sinus outflow tracts are highlights in the recent advancements in sinus surgery for CRSwNP. The Draf 3 or modified endoscopic Lothrop procedure has become a standard technique and demonstrated to improve quality of life and decrease polyp recurrence. A number of mucosal grafting or mucosal flap techniques have been described that cover exposed bone of the neo-ostium and evidence shows that this improves healing and diameter of the Draf 3. Partial middle turbinectomy, while controversial, appears to help decrease polyp recurrence in long-term follow-up studies. Modified endoscopic medial maxillectomy improves access to the maxillary sinus mucosa, facilitates debridement and, particularly, in the cystic fibrosis nasal polyp patient, improves overall management of the disease. Sphenoid drill-out procedure provides wider access for topical steroid irrigations and also may improve management of CRSwNP.

CONCLUSION

Surgical intervention remains a mainstay of therapy for CRSwNP. Newer techniques revolve around improving access for topical steroid therapy.

[History of frontal sinus surgery and current view of the problem. Part 2]

Surgical treatment of inflammatory diseases of the frontal sinus is one of the biggest challenges of modern otorhinolaryngology. Close proximity of the frontal sinus and frontal sinus drainage pathways to the skull base, the orbit and the anterior ethmoid artery, great limitations with its visualization and instrumentation, and high risk of the frontal recess scarring cause difficulties in either endoscopic or external approaches to the frontal sinus. At the same time endoscopic approach to the frontal sinus is considered as preferred method of frontal sinusitis surgical treatment by majority of peers nowadays. The introduction of extended approaches to the frontal sinus pathology treatment with frontal sinus floor and interfrontal sinus septum drill-out as well as superior septectomy with common drainage pathway formation gave an opportunity to greatly decrease a rate of indications for external frontal sinus procedures. In this paper historical backgrounds of endonasal approaches to frontal sinuses are presented, current controversies in proper selection of extent and methods of the frontal sinus surgery are analyzed and endoscopic as well as external approaches to frontal sinuses are summarized.

Value of a lateral inferior pedicle flap in Draf IIb for recurrent frontal sinus diseases: a prospective study

Purpose

The Draf IIb procedure allows the widest unilateral access to the frontal sinus in a minimally invasive fashion, with efficiency and safety comparable to the Draf III. However, this technique is still associated with a high postoperative stenosis rate. The exposure of drilled bone induces osteitis predisposing to scarring and neo-osteogenesis causing ostium restenosis. We developed a novel lateral inferior pedicle flap (LIPF) to cover the exposed bone and prevent restenosis during Draf IIb. We aimed to describe our technique.

Methods

Adult patients requiring a Draf IIb for unilateral recurrent frontal sinus disease were prospectively enrolled. A LIPF technique was systematically performed. Demographics and complications were recorded. The primary outcome measure was neo-ostium patency at 12 months. In patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the clinical control rate was evaluated at 12 months.

Results

59 patients underwent the Draf IIb with LIPF technique from 2013 to 2021. 49 patients (20 women/29 men, median age of 48.0 years) completed at least 12 months of follow-up (median 41.0 months, range 12–100 months). Indications included recalcitrant CRS (n = 32), inverted papilloma (n = 9) and frontal mucocele (n = 8). Overall, the neo-ostium remained patent at 12 months in all patients, and the clinical control rate of 32 patients with recalcitrant CRS at 12 months was 100%. No main complications were recorded.

Conclusion

The LIPF technique was associated with a high rate of success for a Draf IIb.

Safety and Efficacy of the Draf IIb Procedure: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature to evaluate the indications, safety, and efficacy of the Draf IIb procedure and to evaluate the added advantages of technical factors such as stents and flaps.

DATA SOURCES

Articles published until July 2019 on Medline and Cochrane databases.

REVIEW METHODS

After a systematic review based on the 2018 PRISMA guidelines was conducted, 26 of 1533 articles were included and reviewed for indications of Draf IIb; surgical technique; use of flaps, stents, grafts, or mitomycin; complications during and after surgery; and success or recurrence rate.

RESULTS

The main indication for Draf IIb was chronic frontal rhinosinusitis (61.82%). The postoperative patency rate was 87.85%. When flaps/grafts were applied, the rate was 93.5%, but their added value was not statistically significant. Stents could be an alternative for revision surgery. Treating frontal pathologies other than chronic rhinosinusitis was also satisfying. Safety was comparable to Draf III: no perioperative complications were reported, only a few postoperative ones (eyelid ecchymosis and periorbital cellulitis in 0.2% of the cases, hyposmia in 1.55%).

CONCLUSION

When properly indicated, Draf IIb frontal drilling is a safe and highly effective surgical technique for frontal pathology treatment, with efficiency and safety comparable to the Draf III, making it a valid option when a bilateral approach is not needed. More studies are required to confirm the added values of flaps, grafts, and stents.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021

I.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR-RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR-RS-2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence-based findings of the document.

METHODS

ICAR-RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence-based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence-based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary.

RESULTS

ICAR-RS-2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence-based management algorithm is provided.

CONCLUSION

This ICAR-RS-2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence-based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

Appropriate extent of surgery for aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease

The current literature lacks strong guidelines regarding surgical management of patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD), who present with the clinical triad of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), bronchial asthma, and aspirin/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug intolerance. To further define the effectiveness of sinus surgery in treating AERD patients, this review article discusses current evidence regarding outcomes associated with more extensive surgery, the benefits of frontal sinus surgery on polyposis, and the role of Draf III intervention. Numerous studies suggest that Draf III frontal sinusotomy may be an efficacious early intervention due to increased neo-ostial patency and subsequent distribution of topical therapies. Future studies that further investigate the efficacy and safety of extensive surgery in AERD patients are warranted.

Quality of Life Outcomes in Frontal Sinus Surgery

Introduction: Although significant experience has been gained in the technical nuances of endoscopic sinus surgery procedures, the patient-reported outcomes of frontal endoscopic sinus surgery procedures are still poorly understood. In this study we used the validated patient outcome measure Sino Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) to assess the preoperative and postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (Draf type 2 and Draf type 3 procedures). Methods: Out of a total of 680 patients undergoing endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery and 186 patients undergoing frontal sinus surgery, 99 chronic rhinosinusitis patients with (CRSwNP) or without (CRSnNP) nasal polyps undergoing Draf 2 or Draf 3 were assessed. Results: The mean preoperative SNOT-22 was 45.6 points for patients undergoing Draf 2 and 59 for patients undergoing Draf 3, while the mean radiological Lund–Mackay Score was 14.3 and 14.5, respectively. Mean SNOT 22 improvement was 22.9 points for Draf 2 and 37 points for Draf 3 respectively and remained significant in all time intervals, including at 4 years after surgery. With the exception of loss of smell/taste, all symptoms improved by a far bigger extent in Draf 3 group, despite the considerably worse starting point. Effect size (Cohen / Standard Deviations) of Draf 3 was greatest in the following symptoms: “being frustrated/restless/irritable” (1.63), “nasal blockage” (1.43), “reduced concentration” (1.35), “fatigue” (1.29) “runny nose” (1.26) and “need to blow nose” (1.17). Frontal sinus (neo) ostium was patent (fully or partly) at last follow up in 98% of Draf 2 patients and in 88% of patients following Draf 3. Patients with non-patent frontal (neo-) ostium however had a mean postoperative SNOT 22 score of 43 compared to 20 of those with patent frontal sinus (neo-) ostium, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Patients undergoing Draf 3 have a greater burden of disease, including both nasal and emotional/general symptoms compared to Draf 2 patients; surgery results in improvement in both groups, although Draf 3 patients have the greatest benefit, especially in emotional / general symptons. In this way both groups achieve similar postoperative quality of life, despite the different starting points.

Impact of Draf III, Draf IIb, and Draf IIa frontal sinus surgery on nasal irrigation distribution

BACKGROUND

Delivery of topical pharmacotherapy to the paranasal sinuses remains integral to the management of chronic rhinosinusitis. The frontal sinus remains a difficult access site for irrigations, often limited by its position relative to the nostril and ethmoid sinus. In view of the previous demonstration of improved frontal sinus irrigation with Draf III vs Draf IIa, in this work we sought to evaluate topical access of Draf IIb relative to Draf IIa and Draf III modification of the frontal sinus outflow tract.

METHODS

Unfixed human cadaver heads were dissected using Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies. Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies were performed in progressive sequence on each cadaver head. Nasal irrigation fluid access to the frontal sinus was tested after each successive frontal sinus intervention. Irrigations were performed using Frankfort horizontal and vertex positioning. Blinded reviewers were then asked to evaluate nasal irrigation access based on an ordinal scale.

RESULTS

Eight cadaveric specimens (age, 78 ± 12.3 years; 62.5% female) were assessed. The greatest distribution scores were recorded by Draf III, then IIb, and then IIa (90.7% vs 81.3% vs 50.1%; p < 0.001). Similarly, the rate of lavage was greatest with Draf III (50% vs 12.5% vs 12.5%). Vertex positioning and increasing volume trended toward improved distribution but did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Adequate delivery of topical therapy to the paranasal sinuses by nasal irrigation remains critical in the postoperative state. Although increasing the dimensions of the frontal recess improves nasal irrigation delivery, the Draf III procedure provides the optimal delivery of pharmacotherapy in those with frontal sinus disease.

Comparison of the Modified Version of DRAF III to the Conventional DRAF III: A 5 Year Study

A modification is made to the conventional way of doing Draf III by completely avoiding burrs by using only gouges and punches to reduce the postoperative narrowing followed by local instillation of budesonide solution. The results are compared. The comparison was made in terms of surgical duration, frontal ostium size, and recurrence of pathology. This is a prospective non-randomised comparative study in a private practice setting. 25 patients (15 males and 10 females) who underwent Draf III surgery between April 2012 and March 2017 were included in the study. Among them, 14 patients were assigned surgery only with punches and gouges. All the patients were given budesonide nasal instillation postoperatively. Outcomes measured included surgical duration, frontal neo-ostium size and, recurrence of pathology. They were followed up for a period of 14 months. The Student's independent t test and χ2 test for independence of attributes were used for statistical analysis. The mean surgical duration for modified Draf III was significantly shorter than conventional Draf III (p value < 0.01). The frontal ostium remained patent in modified Draf III than the Draf III using burrs with a statistical significance (p value < 0.01). The number of cases reporting the absence of recurrence was significantly higher (p value < 0.001) in modified Draf III. Modified Draf III technique, which completely avoids the burr, takes only lesser surgical duration, keeps the frontal ostium patent and drastically reduces recurrence of pathology. Combining postoperative budesonide instillation after modified Draf III helps in achieving promising results.

A prospective, feasibility study to evaluate the efficacy and usability of a novel drivable endoscope in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE

To carry out a pilot study to evaluate the efficacy of a novel, drivable endoscope (the Peregrine™ Drivable ENT Scope), compared to standard rigid endoscopes in the access, visualization, and irrigation of the paranasal sinus anatomy.

METHODS

A prospective, multi-center, feasibility study was conducted on seventeen subjects who underwent primary functional endoscopic sinus surgery and were evaluated with the drivable endoscope and standard, rigid endoscopes (0°, 30° and 70°, as applicable). A CT scan was available for image guidance, as needed. The primary efficacy endpoint was the ability to access and visualize sinonasal anatomic landmarks. Secondary endpoints included device usability, as measured by a usability questionnaire given to surgeons postoperatively; the device's ability to irrigate the sinuses and patient reports of tolerability and pain during postoperative procedures.

RESULTS

The drivable endoscope success rate in visualizing all paranasal sinus anatomic landmarks was 55.6% better than the standard rigid endoscopes: 98.3% (178/181) versus 42.7% (76/178); p < 0.001. Surgeons rated scores of over 4 (on a 1-5 scale) for the usability of the drivable endoscope to enter the maxillary, frontal and sphenoid sinuses. The ability to irrigate the sinuses using the drivable endoscope was given a mean score of 4.3, and image quality was given a mean score of 3.4. The three patients evaluated postoperatively reported low pain and high tolerability scores with the drivable endoscope.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results indicate that the drivable endoscope is effective, easy to use and highly tolerable in sinonasal endoscopy.

Bioabsorbable steroid-eluting sinus stents for patients with refractory frontal diseases undergoing a revision Draf 3 procedure: a case series

Background: Bioabsorbable steroid-eluting sinus stents are safe and effective in maintaining the patency of the frontal sinus ostium. Aims/objectives: To assess the efficacy of steroid-eluting sinus stents in improving postoperative outcomes following revision and re-revision Draf 3 procedures in patients with frontal diseases. Material and methods: Patients with recalcitrant chronic frontal rhinosinusitis (FRS) and mucocele who underwent revision and re-revision Draf 3 procedures from 2015 to 2017 were included. Preoperative disease parameters, demographics, and endoscopic and radiographic images were recorded. Results: Seven patients undergoing the Draf 3 procedure for recalcitrant chronic FRS (43%) and mucocele after complete resection of benign tumours in the frontal sinus (57%) were followed up for a mean of 16.5 months. At the end of follow-up, seven (100%) patients were asymptomatic and all patients (100%) had patent neo-ostia. Conclusions and significance: The use of bioabsorbable steroid-eluting sinus stents had no unanticipated consequences, and the drainage pathways of the frontal neo-ostium remained patent. Steroid-eluting sinus stents may decrease recurrence rates in revision cases where patients have extensive scarring or neo-osteogenesis of the operative field from prior Draf 2 or 3 procedures. Further follow-up of the current cases and studies with larger cohorts are needed.

Validation of a rhinologic virtual surgical simulator for performing a Draf 3 endoscopic frontal sinusotomy

BACKGROUND

We recently introduced a patient-specific rhinologic virtual surgical environment (VSE) that has shown potential for surgical rehearsal of various skull base lesions. Our aim in this study was to validate the usefulness of the rhinology VSE in performing the Draf 3 procedure.

METHODS

An outside-in Draf 3 procedure was performed on 4 cadaver heads. Computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained before and after cadaver dissection (CD). Pre-dissection CT scans were used to construct a cadaver-specific VSE. A virtual Draf 3 dissection (VD) was performed using the same technique. Validation was conducted by comparing the final common frontal outflow tract. A subjective comparison of the post-dissection endoscopic findings (CD vs VD) and an objective measurement using the post-dissection CT scan for the CD and the reconstructed CT scan obtained from the data after the VD was performed.

RESULTS

Subjective overall resemblance of the 2 dissections (CD vs VD) assessed by the 4-point Likert scale (0-3) was 2.5 (median interquartile range [IQR], 0.25) for the 4 cadavers. The median difference for the anteroposterior dimension of the frontal neo-ostium (CD vs VD) assessed in the midsagittal view was 0.11 mm, whereas the median difference for the lateral dimension assessed in the coronal view was 2.71 mm. Thus, no statistical difference was observed.

CONCLUSION

VD showed nearly matching results with the actual cadaver dissection. With further validation, our rhinologic VSE may be used for presurgical planning and rehearsal before the actual Draf 3 procedure is performed in the operating room.

Draf IIB with superior septectomy: finding the "middle ground"

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated a high failure rate of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) with Draf IIa in patients with diffuse polyposis, asthma, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. A high percentage of these patients progress to endoscopic modified Lothrop procedure (EMLP). We describe a modification of the Draf IIb with a superior septectomy (IIb+SS), which may provide similar therapeutic benefit as demonstrated by the distribution of sinus irrigations in the sinus cavity with ESS with IIb+SS vs ESS with EMLP.

METHODS

ESS with IIb+SS was performed on 6 cadaver heads. Fluorescein-dyed irrigations were performed on each head and penetration was recorded using video endoscopy. EMLP was subsequently performed on each head with repeat dye-irrigation and video endoscopy. The videos were reviewed by 4 blinded fellowship-trained rhinologists, and irrigant penetration of the maxillary, ethmoid, frontal, sphenoid sinuses, and olfactory cleft was graded 0 to 3 (3 implying complete staining).

RESULTS

The mean scores when comparing IIb+SS to EMLP were as follows: overall 1.99 vs 1.97 (p = 0.816), maxillary sinus 2.67 vs 2.38 (p = 0.128), ethmoid sinus 1.88 vs 1.98 (p = 0.536), sphenoid sinus 2.58 vs 2.50 (p = 0.467), frontal sinus 1.13 vs 1.38 (p = 0.073), and olfactory cleft 1.71 vs 1.63 (p = 0.529). There was no significant difference between subsites. Interrater reliability was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.781).

CONCLUSION

Performing ESS with IIb+SS provides similar irrigation delivery benefits to ESS with EMLP, without the need for altering natural sinus outflow and creating circumferential scarring. Further studies evaluating its use in patients that are high risk for revision surgery are needed.