MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Outcome measures for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

Sedaghat AR, Campbell RG, Douglas RG, Fokkens WJ, Hamizan AW, Korban ZR, et al.

Rhinology, 2024 Aug 31;62(34):1-37.
PMID: 38829175 DOI: 10.4193/Rhin24.090

BACKGROUND: With the recent proliferation of novel therapeutics for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), there is an immediate need for comprehensive means to assess CRSwNP disease status as well as to determine treatment efficacy. Outcome measures exist in different forms. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) allow patients to provide direct input about their condition that is not possible to obtain in any other way. Common constructs that are measured using PROMs include quality of life or the burden of disease manifestations (e.g., symptom severity). Outcomes may also include the results of objective diagnostic testing/measurement of clinical signs or measured using psychophysical tests. Biomarkers represent an emerging class of outcome measures for CRSwNP and are chosen to directly reflect the active pathophysiologic processes of CRSwNP in the peripheral blood, sinus/polyp tissues, and sinonasal mucus.
METHODS: Narrative review of the literature, identifying and describing outcome measures that may be used in the evaluation of CRSwNP and for assessment of treatment responses.
RESULTS: In this review, we identify many different outcome measures for CRSwNP that fall under the categories of PROM, objective test, psychophysical test or biomarker. We describe the history of each - including seminal studies - and demonstrate the formal validation, psychometric performance, and limitations of each.
CONCLUSIONS: PROMs, objective tests, psychophysical tests and biomarkers represent different classes of outcome measures that are complementary means of assessing CRSwNP disease status and treatment efficacy. The choice or interpretation of a CRSwNP outcome measure should be undertaken with full knowledge of its formal validation, psychometric performance, and limitations.
Fulltext Expert Opinion on Biological Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps in the Gulf Region

Al-Ahmad M, Alsaleh S, Al-Reefy H, Al Abduwani J, Nasr I, Al Abri R, et al.

J Asthma Allergy, 2022;15:1-12.
PMID: 35018101 DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S321017

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is defined as the inflammation of nose and paranasal sinuses, affecting the patients' quality of life and productivity. Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a principal clinical entity confirmed by the existence of chronic sinonasal inflammation and is characterized by anterior or posterior rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, hyposmia and/or facial pressure or facial pain. Several epidemiologic studies have revealed wide variations in the incidence of CRS among regions globally ranging from 4.6% to 12%. The Gulf countries are also witnessing an unprecedented burden of CRSwNP. According to the current clinical guidelines, glucocorticosteroids and antibiotics are the principal pharmacotherapeutic approaches. Endoscopic sinus surgery is recommended for those who have failed maximal pharmacotherapy. Recently, biologics are considered as an alternative best approach due to the complications associated with medical therapy and surgery. However, precise data on the clinical position of biologic agents in the management of CRSwNP in the Gulf region is not available. The present review article addresses the current diagnostic and management approaches for CRSwNP and also emphasizes the role of emerging biologics in the current treatment strategies for CRSwNP in the Gulf region. Further, a consensus protocol was convened to rationalize the guideline recommendations, strategize the best practices with biologics, and develop clinical practice guidelines for all primary-care specialists in the Gulf region. The consensus-based report will be a useful reference tool for primary-care physicians in primary-healthcare settings, regarding the appropriate time for the initiation of biological treatment in the Gulf region.
Fulltext Assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: Development of the Nasal Polyp Patient Assessment Scoring Sheet tool

Alsaleh S, Kamal N, Hopkins C, Al Rand H, Marglani OA, Alterki A, et al.

Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol, 2024 Jun;9(3):e1277.
PMID: 38803462 DOI: 10.1002/lio2.1277

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a heterogeneous disorder with a wide range of validated subjective and objective assessment tools to assess disease severity. However, a comprehensive and easy-to-use tool that integrates these measures for determining disease severity and response to treatment is still obscure. The objective of this study was to develop a standardized assessment tool that facilitates diagnosis, uniform patient monitoring, and comparison of treatment outcomes between different centers both in routine clinical practice and in research.
METHODS: To develop this tool, published literature on assessment tools was searched on various databases. A panel of 12 steering committee members conducted an advisory board meeting to review the findings. Specific outcome measures to be included in a comprehensive assessment tool and follow-up sheet were then collated following consensus approval from the panel. The tool was further validated for content and revised with expert recommendations to arrive at the finalized Nasal Polyp Patient Assessment Scoring Sheet (N-PASS) tool.
RESULTS: The N-PASS tool was developed by integrating the subjective and objective measures for CRS assessment. Based on expert opinions, N-PASS was revised to be used as an easy-to-use guidance tool that captures patient-reported and physician-assessed components for comprehensively assessing disease status and response to treatment.
CONCLUSION: The N-PASS tool can be used to aid in the diagnosis and management of CRS cases with nasal polyps. The tool would also aid in improved monitoring of patients and pave the way for an international disease registry.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Oxford Level 3.
A Novel International Endoscopic Sphenoid Surgery Classification (IESSC): A Delphi Consensus

Albaharna H, Alrasheed A, AlQahtani A, Psaltis AJ, Javer A, Meco C, et al.

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol, 2025 Mar 24.
PMID: 40126454 DOI: 10.1002/alr.23572

BACKGROUND: Advancements in endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery created a need for standardized terminology to describe sphenoid sinus surgery. Although classification systems exist for other sinuses, one for endoscopic sphenoid sinus surgery is lacking. Developing such a system would standardize procedure descriptions and promote a common language among surgeons. This study aimed to develop a new classification system for endoscopic sphenoid surgery.
METHODS: Consensus on a novel endoscopic sphenoid surgery classification system by running the Delphi procedure with 16 rhinology experts from around the world.
RESULTS: Four Delphi rounds were required to reach a consensus on all stages of the classification. The average percentage of agreement on the stages of classification progressively increased from 70.83% in the first round to 87.68% in the last round. The rejection rates continuously decreased from 8.81% in the first round to 4.44% in the last round. The classification system was developed as follows: stage 1, presphenoid surgery; stage 2A, partial sphenoidotomy; stage 2B, complete sphenoidotomy; stage 2C, transpterygoid sphenoidotomy; stage 3A, Rostral sphenoidectomy; and stage 3B, extended sphenoid drill-out.
CONCLUSIONS: This novel endoscopic sphenoid surgery classification system facilitates the description of different sphenoid sinus procedures, providing surgeons with better opportunities for discussion and communication.
European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020

Fokkens WJ, Lund VJ, Hopkins C, Hellings PW, Kern R, Reitsma S, et al.

Rhinology, 2020 Feb 20;58(Suppl S29):1-464.
PMID: 32077450 DOI: 10.4193/Rhin20.600

The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise . The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. The full document can be downloaded for free on the website of this journal: http://www.rhinologyjournal.com.