What Is the Role of the Endoscope in the Sinus Preservation Management of Frontal Sinus Fractures?

Management of Frontal Sinus Fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center: Retrospective Study and Review of the Literature

Study Design

Case series.

Objective

This retrospective review of frontal sinus fractures aims to describe our current experience managing these fractures at an urban level I trauma center.

Methods

An institutional database of 2081 patients who presented with maxillofacial fractures on computed tomography face/sinus in 2019 was queried for all patients with traumatic frontal sinus fractures. Demographics, trauma-related history, management approach, and follow-up data were collected and analyzed.

Results

Sixty-three (7.3%) patients had at least one fracture involving the frontal sinus. The most common etiologies were assaults, falls, and motor vehicle accidents. Surgical repair was performed in 26.8% of patients with frontal sinus fractures, and the other 73.2% were observed. Fractures that were displaced, comminuted, obstructive of the frontal sinus outflow tract, or associated with a dural tear or cerebrospinal fluid leak were more likely to be operative.

Conclusions

The majority of frontal sinus fractures in this study were treated with observation. Despite advances in transnasal endoscopic approaches, many surgeons still rely on open approaches to repair frontal sinus fractures.

Management of frontal sinus fractures requiring surgical intervention: An analysis of a case series

<b><br>Introduction:</b> Isolated frontal bone fractures constitute 5-15% of traumatic facial fractures cases, with frontal sinus fractures categorized into anterior wall, posterior wall, or complex fractures. The approach is tailored to fracture type and bone fragment displacement. This paper presents the summary of surgical management in patients with isolated and complex fractures of the anterior wall of the frontal sinus.</br> <b><br>Material and Methods:</b> Five patients with different frontal sinus fractures were treated surgically. The same management protocol - diagnosis and surgical intervention was implemented in all cases The retrospective analysis included fracture assessment, surgical approach, and long-term outcomes evaluation.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> The most common cause of fractures was falls, while two complex fractures involved the anterior and posterior walls. External approach, bone fragment removal, endoscopy, and external stabilization were employed in all cases. One patent required delayed revision surgery due to retaining metallic foreign body. Follow-up radiological examinations showed proper healing and cosmetic outcomes were satisfactory in all of the cases.</br> <b><br>Conclusion:</b> Surgical management of isolated fractures of the frontal sinus anterior wall, involving bone fragment removal, realignment, and endoscopy, yielded satisfactory functional and cosmetic outcomes without internal or external stabilization. Long-term monitoring and symptom assessment are crucial, especially in cases with penetrating injuries and foreign body risk.</br>.

Frontal Sinus Fractures: A Contemporary Approach in the Endoscopic Era

Although frontal sinus fractures are relatively uncommon, the potential for long-term morbidity is significant. Management strategies remain controversial due to a lack of strong clinical evidence. Despite a paucity of strong literature, a logical treatment algorithm is presented based on the structural integrity of three anatomic parameters: anterior table, frontal sinus outflow tract, and the posterior table/dura. The literature supports a paradigm shift from open surgical management to a more conservative treatment algorithm emphasizing observation and minimally invasive endoscopic techniques. Long-term follow-up for complex frontal sinus injuries is critical.

Endonasal Free Flap Reconstruction Combined With Draf Frontal Sinusotomy for Complex Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak: A Technical Report & Case Series

BACKGROUND

Frontal sinus cranialization with closure via bifrontal pericranial flaps is the gold standard for separating the nasofrontal recess from the intracranial cavity for posterior table defects. Despite the high success rate, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak may persist and is particularly challenging when vascularized reconstructive options from the bicoronal incision are exhausted.

OBJECTIVE

To assess a novel endonasal technique using an adipofascial radial forearm free flap delivered to the frontal recess through a Draf sinusotomy to repair complex CSF leaks from the frontal sinus.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 3 patients (all male; ages 42, 43, and 69 yr) with persistent CSF leak despite frontal sinus cranialization and repair with bifrontal pericranium was performed. Etiology of injury was traumatic in 2 patients and iatrogenic in 1 patient after anaplastic meningioma treatment. To create space for the flap and repair the nasofrontal ducts, endoscopic Draf III (Case 1, 3) or Draf IIb left frontal sinusotomy (Case 2) was performed. The forearm flap was harvested, passed through a Caldwell-Luc exposure, and placed within the Draf frontal sinustomy. The flap vessels were tunneled to the left neck and anastomosed to the facial vessels by the mandibular notch.

RESULTS

Intraoperatively, the flaps were well-seated and provided a watertight seal. Postoperative hospital courses were uncomplicated. There were no new CSF leaks or flap necrosis at 12, 14, and 16 mo.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic endonasal free flap reconstruction through a Draf procedure is a novel viable option for persistent CSF leak after failed frontal sinus cranialization.

Frontal Sinus Fractures: A Review on Etiology and Management Emphasizing Minimally Invasive and Endoscopic Techniques

ABSTRACT

In spite of a long and tortuous history of the acute management of frontal sinus fractures, current optimal management remains steeped in controversy. These fractures are frequently produced by excessive forces and are often accompanied with other injuries. However, disruption of the nasofrontal duct persists as essential to maintain proper sinus function and should guide current management. Although there has never been any distinct procedure defining optimal outcomes, proper treatment is contingent on precise diagnosis culled from a complete history, physical examination, and imaging studies. This is further augmented by the surgeon's intraoperative findings. Reconstruction will ultimately rest on the degree of disruption of the anterior and posterior sinus walls, as well as the status and function of the nasofrontal ducts. For these reasons, current management continues to be challenging and evolving. Thus, this review will discuss the etiology and clinical presentation of frontal sinus fractures, the current complications arising in the subject, and the evolution of treatment options towards a more conservative and endoscopic approach to care.

Treatment of Frontal Sinus Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There is still no consensus about the best treatment for frontal sinus fractures (FSFs). Thus, the aims of this study were to answer the following questions: 1) what treatment of FSFs has the lowest rate of postoperative complications? 2) does sinus preservation using observation produce a lower complication rate? 3) are FSFs with nasofrontal outflow tract (NFOT) injury associated with greater complication rates following different treatment options when compared to those patients without NFOT involvement?

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed based on PRISMA that included several databases with specific keywords, a reference search, and a manual search for suitable articles. Randomized clinical trials, controlled clinical studies, retrospective studies and case series that estimated complications rate after different treatments options for FSFs were included. The predictor variable was treatment groups, including observation, ORIF, cranialization and obliteration. The outcome variable was complication rate and correlation between complication rate and presence/absence of NFOT. A weighted complication rate/proportion using a random effect model, or risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), was performed to construct forest plots. Data analysis was done using a comprehensive meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2,911 patients with FSFs enrolled in 23 studies were included in this study. The weighted complication rate for different treatment was as follows: observation (7%), ORIF (9.4%), obliteration (10.6%), and cranialization (11%). Nonsurgical treatment decreased the complication rate by 2.1 times (low quality evidence, RR = 2.1, CI: 1.13 to 3.9, P = .000) when compared to surgical treatments for FSFs. CR for fractures with NFOT was 8 % (55/619) compared to a complication rate of 5% (18/353) for fractures without NFOT with insignificant difference (very low quality evidence, RR = 1.7, CI: 0.75 to 4.1, P = .158).

CONCLUSIONS

FSFs vary in their severity and treatments. The more severe fractures, the higher the complication rate, no matter how they were treated.

Is there still a role for cranialization in modern sinus surgery?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To give an overview of recently published literature on the indications and use of cranialization of the frontal sinuses.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies on cranialization have evaluated its role in frontal sinus fractures, inflammatory disease, and tumors involving both the frontal sinus and anterior cranial fossa. Currently, a more conservative approach is favored with traumatic injury to the frontal sinus outflow tract, with multiple studies demonstrating outflow recanalization with observation alone. Similarly, advancements in endoscopic sinus surgical approaches allow the many posterior table fractures to be managed without cranialization. Severe inflammatory disease of the frontal sinus including giant mucoceles with frontal lobe compression have successfully been managed without cranialization in multiple studies suggesting an endoscopic surgical approach can be favored in these settings. Both benign and malignant tumors of the frontal sinus are managed without cranialization with select cases favoring an open approach with cranialization depending on tumor location. Malignant tumors of the frontal sinus are more likely to require cranialization as oncologic resection including margins can lead to large dural defects with significant tissue loss, which is unfavorable for more conservative reconstructive options.

SUMMARY

Cranialization remains a necessary and indicated procedure in the appropriate clinical circumstances. A more conservative approach to frontal sinus fractures is warranted, with recent literature supporting similar outcomes and less morbidity. Inflammatory disease of the frontal sinus including giant mucoceles with frontal lobe compression can be managed without cranialization. Although most benign tumors can be resected via endoscopic approaches, cranialization remains a mainstay as part of the reconstructive plan after oncologic resection of malignant tumors involving the frontal sinus.