Value of septoturbinal flap in the frontal sinus drill-out type IIb according to draf

Enhancing Frontal Sinus Surgery: Assessing the Long-Term Impact of Free Grafts and Flaps in Draf III Procedures

The frontal sinus medial drainage -Draf Type III (modified endoscopic Lothrop) procedure, has become a cornerstone in frontal sinus surgery over the last three decades. Despite its widespread acceptance, challenges such as restenosis and neo-ostium closure persist, prompting the exploration of various preventive techniques. In this retrospective study, we analyzed data from 111 patients who underwent the Draf III procedure between November 2015 and November 2023, with a mean follow-up period of 3 years and 11 months. Approximately two-thirds of patients (64%) had undergone previous sinus surgery and 16% a previous Draf III. Over half of the patients had inflammatory conditions, with the majority being chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) (46%), while 15% were diagnosed with malignant sinonasal tumors, and 23% with benign sinonasal tumors, of which the commonest was osteoma, accounting for 14 cases. The mean follow-up period was 3 years and 11 months. We focused on evaluating the efficacy of mucosal flaps and free grafts in preventing neo-ostium closure. Although it appears that there is no statistically significant correlation between flap usage and the need for revision surgery or ostium patency maintenance overall, subgroup analysis highlighted the benefits of flap reconstruction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. In this subgroup, the use of flaps or grafts reduced the rate of neo-ostium stenosis from 20% to 0% (p < 0.05). Overall revision rate was 11.7%-however this was 8% in patients without acute inflammation at the time of surgery and went up to 31% in the presence of pus in the frontal recess (p = 0.02). This study contributes to the existing literature by providing insights into long-term outcomes, the enduring effectiveness of interventions in frontal sinus surgery, and especially the importance of taking into account the underlying pathology when assessing long-term outcomes.

[Local flap reconstruction techniques after frontal sinus drainage type II and III according to Draf]

BACKGROUND

Extended endonasal endoscopic frontal sinus surgery is characterized by bone resection beyond the lamellae of the frontal sinus and is currently classified according to Draf as type IIa, type IIb, modified type III (also referred to as type IIc), and type III. This approach is indicated when the surgical goal cannot be achieved through complete removal of the anterior ethmoidal cells. Numerous studies indicate restenosis rates ranging from 7 to 36%, despite creation of maximal openings. Exposed bone, which tends to epithelize slowly with significant crusting and the risk of uncontrolled wound healing depending on the local environment and other factors, is considered a contributing factor. Covering the exposed bone with mucosa can significantly reduce the risk of restenosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A variety of flap techniques for frontal sinus drainage in Draf III procedures are presented, including some variants that were part of presentations at the 2023 Congress of the European Rhinologic Society in Sofia, Bulgaria. These include combinations of free mucosal grafts, pedicled mucosal flaps, and hybrids combining both techniques. Additionally, the results of current studies are presented.

CONCLUSION

The results and achieved opening areas in contemporary Draf III surgeries are significantly improved and larger compared to the early stages of these procedures. A multitude of published studies consistently demonstrate that outcomes are markedly improved with mucosal coverage. Depending on the prevailing anatomy, mucosal conditions, and the extent of the surgical intervention, the most suitable technique should be selected. Therefore, proficiency in various methods is crucial. The use of a flap technique (free, pedicled, or combinations thereof) should be defined as the standard when performing extended frontal sinus surgery (Draf IIb, IIc, III, or endonasal frontal sinus surgery [EFSS] 4-6).

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.

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.

The use of grafts in frontal sinus drill-outs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A significant complication of the frontal sinus drill-out procedure is restenosis of the frontal neo-ostium. To improve postoperative healing in this region, various mucosal grafts and pedicled flaps have been designed to reconstruct the mucosal lining of the frontal neo-ostium. We provide an overview of the types of grafts described for reconstruction and discuss the latest evidence on their efficacy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Frontal neo-ostium mucosal reconstruction may be performed using free, pedicled, or a combination of grafts. There are several case series that report good outcomes and low revision rates following the use of grafts in frontal sinus drill-outs, and one randomized controlled study demonstrating increased ostial patency. However, the use of grafts did not alter the rate of revision surgery and only one study reported an improvement in Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 scores after one year.

SUMMARY

Studies have suggested that frontal sinus drill-out grafts result in favorable restenosis and graft success rates. However, larger randomized control trials will be required to determine whether frontal sinus drill-out grafts contribute to a tangible clinical benefit for patients.

Effect of a Superior Lateral Anterior Pedicle Flap for Draf Procedures

Several types of flap techniques have been developed to cover exposed bone after Draf procedures to reduce the possibility of re-stenosis. These techniques are relatively new and detailed measurements of the size of neo-Ostia during follow-up have not been reported. The authors aim to assess outcomes precisely by not only using endoscopic evaluation but also by measuring the diameter of the ostium and the thickness of the nasal beaks on pre- and postoperative computed tomography images. The authors reviewed 25 patients with 37 nasal cavities who have undergone a Draf surgery with a previously-reported superior lateral anterior pedicle flap technique. The anteroposterior (AP) distance of the frontal recess and the thickness of the nasal beaks were measured before, immediately after, and more than 6 months after surgery. Measured distances were statistically analyzed. The neo-ostium remained patent in long-term follow-up of all patients. The AP distance of the frontal recess and the thickness of the nasal beak were preserved during follow-up. Neither synechiae nor orbital injuries occurred. In conclusion, Draf type II and III procedures with superior lateral anterior pedicle flaps are safe and effective. Neo-Ostia remained patent throughout the follow-up period.

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.

Lacrimal sac exposure and a superior lateral anterior pedicle flap to improve outcomes of Draf type II and III procedures

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of Draf type II and III procedures for frontal sinus diseases is well recognized, a certain amount of postoperative stenosis of the frontal neo-ostium occurs. Exposed bone induces inflammation and leads to osteoneogenesis. To prevent stenosis, we developed a surgical technique designed to minimize bone exposure while maximizing the frontal neo-ostium area created with Draf type II and III procedures. We fully exposed the lacrimal sac and used a superior lateral anterior pedicle flap to cover the exposed bone during the Draf procedure. We aimed to describe our technique.

METHODS

We reviewed 19 patients who underwent a Draf type II or III procedure with our technique. Endoscopic views from the follow-ups and complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, the neo-ostium remained patent in all patients. No complications, such as synechiae or orbital injury, were seen in any of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Draf type II and III procedures with lacrimal sac exposure and a superior lateral anterior pedicle flap are convenient and seem to be effective. However, further studies with larger numbers of patients are needed to verify our technique.

Value of double pedicled mucoperiosteal flaps for the prevention of restenosis in Draf IIb frontal sinusotomy

INTRODUCTION

The extent of bone exposure is one of the major factors contributing to failure of endoscopic frontal sinusotomy procedures. Double flaps providing cover of exposed bone have already been described for Draf III procedures in a cadavre study using posterior and lateral pedicled nasoseptal flaps. As these flaps overlap on the septal side, they cannot be raised from the same nasal cavity in a Draf IIb procedure. We describe a new technique using 2 local mucoperiosteal flaps raised from the same side to entirely cover the bone margins exposed by Draf IIb frontal sinusotomy.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

A left Draf IIb procedure was performed to drain a frontal mucocele. A posterior septoturbinal flap (PSTF) was raised to cover the posterior sinusotomy margin. A lateral pedicle nasoseptal flap (LNSF) was raised on the same side to cover the anterior margin. With a follow-up of 6 months, the Draf IIb cavity was fully patent and the flaps were well integrated.

CONCLUSION

PSTF and LNSF flaps can be raised on the same side to cover the posterior and anterior margins of the Draf IIb frontal sinusotomy, respectively.

Frontal sinus revision rate after nasal polyposis surgery including frontal recess clearance and middle turbinectomy: A long-term analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frontal sinus revision rate after nasal polyposis (NP) surgery including frontal recess clearance (FRC) and middle turbinectomy (MT), to search for predictive factors and to analyse surgical management.

METHODS

Longitudinal analysis of 153 patients who consecutively underwent bilateral sphenoethmoidectomy with FRC and MT for NP with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Decision of revision surgery was made in case of medically refractory chronic frontal sinusitis or frontal mucocele. Univariate and multivariate analysis incorporating clinical and radiological variables were performed.

RESULTS

The frontal sinus revision rate was 6.5% (10/153). The mean time between the initial procedure and revision surgery was 3 years, 10 months. Osteitis around the frontal sinus outflow tract (FSOT) was associated with a higher risk of frontal sinus revision surgery (p=0.01). Asthma and aspirin intolerance did not increase the risk, as well as frontal sinus ostium diameter or residual frontoethmoid cells. Among revised patients, 60% required multiple procedures and 70% required frontal sinus ostium enlargement.

CONCLUSIONS

Our long-term study reports that NP surgery including FRC and MT is associated with a low frontal sinus revision rate (6.5%). Patients developing osteitis around the FSOT have a higher risk of frontal sinus revision surgery. As mucosal damage can lead to osteitis, FSOT mucosa should be preserved during initial NP surgery. However, as multiple procedures are common among NP patients requiring frontal sinus revision, frontal sinus ostium enlargement should be considered during first revision in the hope of reducing the need of further revisions.

Mucocele formation after surgical treatment of inverted papilloma of the frontal sinus drainage pathway

BACKGROUND

Inverted papillomas (IP) inserted in the frontal sinus and/or recess may be treated by using an endoscopic endonasal or an external approach. There are still few data available on this uncommon localization of IPs.

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience in the management of IP of the frontal drainage pathway, to describe a previously unreported specific complication of this surgery, and to discuss the optimal surgical strategy.

METHODS

A retrospective study of the patients at a tertiary care center between 2004 and 2014 who were operated on for an IP with an insertion in the frontal recess and/or the frontal sinus. Clinical charts were reviewed for demographics, clinical presentation, imaging findings, surgical treatment, and outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were included. Patients were operated on by using a purely endoscopic approach (Draf procedure; n = 14 [51.9%]) when the IP was inserted in the frontal recess and/or the frontal sinus infundibulum (with a nasoseptal-septoturbinal flap placed on the exposed bone in four patients), or by using a combined endoscopic and open approach (osteoplastic flap procedure; n = 13 [48.1%]) when the IP invaded the frontal sinus beyond the infundibulum. There were two recurrences (7.4%), with a mean follow-up of 40 months (range, 9-123 months). During follow-up, single or multiple iatrogenic frontal mucoceles were observed in 10 patients (37%), with a mean delay of 60 months (range, 27-89 months). These mucoceles occurred both after using endoscopic (n = 3) or combined (n = 7) approaches, and required a surgical treatment in eight patients. No postoperative mucocele was observed in the four patients who had had a septal flap.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, an approach based on the localization of the IP insertion provided acceptable results in terms of the local control rate (92.6%). However, the significant rate of postoperative mucoceles indicated that specific strategies (such as local flaps) still need to be developed to avoid this iatrogenic complication.