Cerebral Bypass Surgery: Level of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Cerebral bypasses are categorized according to function (flow augmentation or flow preservation) and to characteristics: direct, indirect or combined bypass, extra-to-intracranial or intra-to-intracranial bypass, and high-, moderate- or low-capacity bypass. We critically summarize the current state of evidence and grades of recommendation for cerebral bypass surgery. METHODS The current indications for cerebral bypass are discussed depending on the function of the bypass (flow preservation or augmentation) and analyzed according to level of evidence criteria. RESULTS Flow-preservation bypass plays an important role in managing complex intracranial aneurysms (level of evidence 4; grade of recommendation C). Flow-preservation bypass is currently only very rarely indicated in the treatment of cerebral tumors involving major cerebral arteries (level of evidence 5; grade of recommendation D). The trend has evolved in favor of partial resection and radiotherapy. To preserve the flow, the bypass is always a direct bypass.Flow-augmentation bypass is currently recommended for Moyamoya patients with ischemic symptoms and compromised hemodynamics (level of evidence 4; grade of recommendation C) and patients with hemorrhagic onset (level of evidence 1B; grade of recommendation A). Flow-augmentation bypass is currently not recommended for patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery occlusion, even in the setting of compromised cerebral hemodynamics (level of evidence 1A; grade of recommendation A), but may be considered in patients with hemodynamic failure and recurrent medically refractory symptoms as a final resort (level of evidence 5; grade of recommendation D). CONCLUSIONS The results of recent randomized clinical trials narrow the indication for cerebral bypass in the setting of ischemic cerebrovascular disease. However, cerebral bypass is still very useful for managing complex intracranial aneurysms (not amenable to selective clipping or endovascular therapies) and is the only treatment option for managing symptomatic patients with Moyamoya vasculopathy and impaired brain hemodynamics

International Consensus Statement on Rhinology and Allergy: Rhinosinusitis

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