Current practices regarding middle turbinate resection among otolaryngologists

Abstract Objectives Resection of the middle turbinate (MT) during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) has been a controversial topic among otolaryngologists for many years. Some studies advocate resection and have shown improved outcomes postoperatively, while studies favoring preservation show a decreased incidence of postoperative complications. The current practice pattern regarding this subject is unknown. The goal of this study was to learn the current practice of MT resection during ESS among otolaryngologists. Method We performed an electronic anonymous survey of practicing otolaryngologists. Results We found that the majority of the 252 responders stated that they will perform an MT resection in certain clinical situations, while there is a small subset that advocates never resecting the MT for inflammatory sinus disease (n = 6, 2.4%). Participants were significantly more likely to perform MT resection in patients undergoing revision compared to primary ESS for all conditions included. The complication of greatest concern among participants was iatrogenic frontal sinus obstruction, while empty nose was of the least concern. The majority of participants responded that MT resection was of extreme or moderate benefit for improved visualization and drug delivery postoperatively. When compared to general otolaryngologists, fellowship‐trained rhinologists were less concerned about potential complications following MT resection and were more likely to perceive an extreme or moderate benefit from turbinate resection postoperatively. Conclusion There remains debate over MT resection among otolaryngologists, but the results of this study show that the majority of participating otolaryngologists will perform a resection in certain clinical situations

国际过敏与鼻科学共识声明 : 变应性鼻炎

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/1/ICARPrimaryAuthorCOIForms1.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/2/ICARSecondaryAuthorCOIForms.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/3/ICARPrimaryAuthorCOIForms2.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/4/ICARAuthorCOI2017.8.15.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/5/alr22073_c.pd

International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

BackgroundCritical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR).MethodsUsing previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus.ResultsThe ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR.ConclusionThis critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding

国际过敏与鼻科学共识声明 : 变应性鼻炎

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/1/ICARPrimaryAuthorCOIForms1.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/2/ICARSecondaryAuthorCOIForms.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/3/ICARPrimaryAuthorCOIForms2.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/4/ICARAuthorCOI2017.8.15.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150599/5/alr22073_c.pd