Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps Associated with Expanded Types of Endoscopic Sinus Surgery
Background: Surgical criteria for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) remain unresolved. This study addresses these discrepancies by comparing the clinical outcomes of expanded–functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (E–FESS) with more-limited FESS (L-FESS). Methods: A database was analy...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:idus.us.es:11441/178866 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/178866 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13030866 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Chronic rhinosinusitis Ethmoid Nasal polyps Nasal surgical procedures Paranasal sinuses Quality of life SNOT-22 |
| Sumario: | Background: Surgical criteria for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) remain unresolved. This study addresses these discrepancies by comparing the clinical outcomes of expanded–functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (E–FESS) with more-limited FESS (L-FESS). Methods: A database was analyzed retrospectively to compare surgical outcomes in CRSwNP patients who underwent E-FESS versus those subjected to L-FESS. Quality of life, endoscopic and radiological outcomes were compared at the baseline and two years after surgery. The clinical status of the responder was defined when a minimal clinically important difference of 12 points in SNOT-22 change was achieved. Results: A total of 274 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed; 111 underwent E-FESS and 163 were subjected to L-FESS. Both groups exhibited significant clinical improvements, although a greater magnitude of change in SNOT-22 (14.8 ± 4.8, p = 0.002) was shown after E-FESS. Higher significant improvements for endoscopic and radiological scores and lower surgical revision rates were also noted in the E-FESS group. Conclusions: E-FESS provides better clinical outcomes and reduced revision surgery rates when compared to L-FESS in CRSwNP patients two years after surgery, irrespective of any comorbidity. Further randomized prospective studies are needed to comprehensively contrast these results. |
|---|