Real-world evidence analysis of the impact of steroid-eluting implants on healthcare resource use among chronic rhinosinusitis patients undergoing sinus surgery

Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Infectious Rhinosinusitis

Rhinosinusitis is a common inflammatory disease of the sinonasal mucosa and paranasal sinuses. The pathogenesis of rhinosinusitis involves a variety of factors, including genetics, nasal microbiota status, infection, and environmental influences. Pathogenic microorganisms, including viruses, bacteria, and fungi, have been proven to target the cilia and/or epithelial cells of ciliated airways, which results in the impairment of mucociliary clearance, leading to epithelial cell apoptosis and the loss of epithelial barrier integrity and immune dysregulation, thereby facilitating infection. However, the mechanisms employed by pathogenic microorganisms in rhinosinusitis remain unclear. Therefore, this review describes the types of common pathogenic microorganisms that cause rhinosinusitis, including human rhinovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Aspergillus species, etc. The damage of mucosal cilium clearance and epithelial barrier caused by surface proteins or secreted virulence factors are summarized in detail. In addition, the specific inflammatory response, mainly Type 1 immune responses (Th1) and Type 2 immune responses (Th2), induced by the entry of pathogens into the body is discussed. The conventional treatment of infectious sinusitis and emerging treatment methods including nanotechnology are also discussed in order to improve the current understanding of the types of microorganisms that cause rhinosinusitis and to help effectively select surgical and/or therapeutic interventions for precise and personalized treatment.

Assessing the effect of absorbable steroid sinus implant: a state-of-the-art systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic sinus surgery is not a definitive treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The use of sinus stents after surgery to maintain sinus patency and deliver local steroids has gained popularity. The first steroid-eluting bioabsorbable implant (SEBI) approved for this indication, later Propel, was developed in 2011. This state-of-the-art review aims to summarize the available evidence, as well as to point out potential pitfalls and lack of specific analyses to guide future research on this new therapeutic option.

DATA SOURCES

Pubmed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, SciELO.

REVIEW METHODS

Nine research questions were defined: Are steroid-eluting Sinus implants useful for the control of CRS symptoms after surgery? Do they improve surgical field healing after CRS surgery? Do they decrease polyp regrowth after ESS? Do they decrease the need for ESS? Are they useful in symptom control as in-office procedure? Are they better than other steroid-impregnated resorbable materials? Do they have a positive impact on olfaction? Are they safe? Are they cost-effective? Retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors.

RESULTS

Twenty nine studies were included: 3 metanalysis, 1 systematic review, 10 randomized clinical trials, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 1 retrospective cohort study, 4 cost studies, 3 case series and 2 expert consensus. The review encompassed a population of 3,012 patients treated with SEBI and 2826 controls.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first state-of-the-art review assessing steroid eluting bioabsorbable stent evidence. Despite the effort in recent years, still several questions remain unanswered. This review will hopefully guide future research efforts to better define the role of SEBI in the otolaryngology practice.

Reduction in healthcare resource use through 24 months following sinus surgery with steroid-eluting implants in chronic rhinosinusitis patients with and without nasal polyps: a real-world study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of steroid-eluting implants after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) on health care resource use (HCRU) in chronic rhinosinusitis patients with (CRSwNP) and without (CRSsNP) nasal polyps.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational cohort study using real-world evidence data included adult patients with CRS who underwent ESS in 2015-2019 with at least 24 months of data before and after ESS. Patients who received implants were matched to patients who did not based on a propensity score developed using baseline characteristics and NP status. HCRU was compared between cohorts within each CRSwNP and CRSsNP subgroup using chi-square tests (binary variables).

RESULTS

The implant cohort in the CRSwNP subgroup had fewer all-cause outpatient (90.0% vs. 93.9%, p < .001) and all-cause otolaryngology (64.3% vs. 76.4%, p < .001) visits as well as fewer endoscopy (40.5% vs. 47.4%, p = .005) and debridement (48.8% vs. 55.6%, p = .007) procedures than the non-implant cohort. The implant cohort in the CRSsNP subgroup had fewer all-cause outpatient (88.9% vs. 94.2%, p < .001) and all-cause otolaryngology (53.5% vs. 74.4%, p < .001) visits as well as fewer endoscopy (31.8% vs. 41.7%, p < .001) and debridement (36.7% vs. 53.4%, p <.001) procedures than the non-implant cohort. Revision sinus surgery was reduced in the implant cohort in both subgroups, and reached statistical significance in the CRSwNP subgroup (3.8% vs. 6.0%, p = .039) but not in the CRSsNP subgroup (3.6% vs. 4.2%, p = .539).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, patients receiving implants had lower HCRU for 24 months after sinus surgery independent of nasal polyp status, and revision surgery was reduced in CRSwNP patients. These findings provide additional evidence that long-term reductions in HCRU may be achieved with steroid-eluting implant use during sinus surgery.What is known on this topicPatients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) have a disproportionately higher burden of disease and consume greater healthcare resources than chronic rhinosinusitis patients without nasal polyps (CRSsNP).CRSwNP patients represent approximately 30% of CRS patients who undergo surgery, but their clinical course is disproportionally complicated by disease recurrence and revision surgery.Steroid-eluting sinus implants have been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term postoperative outcomes after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in CRS patients in general.A recent real-world evidence study reported that steroid-eluting sinus implants following ESS were associated with a reduction in HCRU in CRS patients followed for 18 months, but the impact of implants on HCRU in CRSwNP and CRSsNP patients separately remains unknown. What this study addsIn this observational study, reduced HCRU was observed in CRSwNP and CRSsNP patients who receive steroid-eluting sinus implants.Use of implants in CRSwNP and CRSsNP patients was associated with a significant reduction in healthcare visits (all-cause outpatient, all-cause otolaryngology), and sinus procedures (endoscopy, debridement).Revision surgery was significantly reduced in the implant cohort of CRSwNP patients and trended lower in the implant cohort of CRSsNP patients.Use of implants had no significant impact on all-cause ER/urgent care visits or sinus-related imaging.

Considerations for shared decision-making in treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Shared decision-making is an approach where physicians and patients work together to determine a personalized treatment course. Such an approach is integral to patient-centered care in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). CRSwNP is a chronic inflammatory condition of the sinonasal cavity that can severely impact physical health, smell, and quality of life (QOL). Traditional standard-of-care treatment options include topical (i.e. sprays) and oral corticosteroids and endoscopic sinus surgery, but more recently, novel corticosteroid delivery methods (i.e. high volume irrigations, recently-approved exhalation breath-powered delivering devices, and drug-eluting steroid implants) and 3 new FDA approved biologics directed against type II immunomodulators have become available. The availability of these therapeutics offers exciting new opportunities in CRSwNP management but requires personalized and shared-decision making as each modality has variable impacts on CRSwNP and related comorbid conditions. Studies have published treatment algorithms, but the practical use of these lean guidelines is heavily influenced by the lens of the treating physician, the most common being otolaryngologists and allergy immunologists. Clinical equipoise occurs when there is no basis for one intervention to be regarded as “better” than another. While most guidelines, in general, support the use of topical corticosteroids with or without oral corticosteroids followed by ESS for the majority of unoperated CRSwNP patients, there are situations of clinical equipoise that arise particularly in CRSwNP who have failed surgery or those with severe comorbid conditions. In the shared decision-making process, clinicians and patients must consider symptomatology, goals, comfort, compliance, treatment efficacy, and treatment cost when determining the initial choice of therapy and escalation of therapy with the potential use of multiple modalities for recalcitrant CRSwNP. A summary of salient considerations that might constitute shared decision-making is presented in this summary.