Extended endoscopic frontal nasal sinus surgery in management of chronic and recurrent frontal sinus diseases

Background The anatomical variation of the frontal sinus and its intimate relation to the skull base and orbit makes its surgery demanding. The extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery allows wide better drainage and preventing the recurrence of the disease. Fourteen patients underwent EEFSS from May 2017 to May 2019. These patients are nine patients presented by chronic recurrent frontal sinusitis, three patients presented by chronic recurrent fronto ethmoidal mucocele and two patients with chronic recurrent external frontal fistula. Draff III done for ten patients of them and Draff IIB done for four patients of them. This study is designed for evaluating the efficacy of the extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (E E F S S) in management of chronic and recurrent frontal sinus diseases. Results The neo opening of the restored frontal sinus was remained opened with Draff III with high success rate; two patients from four patients with Draff IIb were with closed nasofrontal duct. The main follow-up was 12 months; the patients were followed up post-operatively for many office visits without any other manifestations. Conclusion The chronic recurrent frontal sinus diseases can be treated successfully with extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (E E F S S). The extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (Draff III) provides good results with low morbidity and less post-operative care.

Frontal Angle: A New Predictor of Difficulty in Endoscopic Frontal Sinus Surgery—A Preliminary Computed Tomography Study

Objectives: The possibility of visualization of the frontal sinus during endoscopic surgery depends on 3-dimensional configuration of the frontal sinus opening (FSO). We aimed to determine the prevalence of unfavorable angulation of the lower part of the posterior wall of the frontal sinus and its relation to FSO diameter. Methods: One hundred and twenty-eight computed tomography (CT) scans were retrospectively reviewed to measure (1) the angle between the nasal floor and the plane tangent to the posterior table of the frontal sinus above the most posterior aspect of the anterior buttress (frontal angle, FA) and (2) dimensions of the FSO. Results: The FA ranged from below 30° to 90°. Nearly 13% of sinuses (16.4% of patients) showed FA about 90°, which should enable good visualization of the sinus with the 30° scope after opening and clearing the frontal recess, while 4% (6.25% of patients) showed FA ≤ 30°. The anterior–posterior diameter (A-PD) was below 5 mm in 17.6% of sinuses (26.6% of patients). There was a significant correlation between FA and A-PD. Unfavorable combination of FA and A-PD (<45°, <5 mm) was present in 5.2% of sinuses (8.6% of patients), and extremely unfavorable combination (<30°, <5 mm) in 0.8% (0.8% of patients). Conclusions: The FA shows great interindividual variability, which is very likely to reflect the possibility of inspection of the frontal sinus. This implies a need for further prospective clinical studies to validate FA as a predictor of difficulty in frontal sinus surgery.

Revision endoscopic frontal sinus surgery for refractory chronic rhinosinusitis via modified agger nasi approach

Objective To examine the clinical effects of revision endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (RESS) through modified agger nasi (MAN)–middle turbinate resection on refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Methods We reviewed 156 patients who were treated for refractory CRS from February 2012 to August 2014. These patients had been diagnosed with refractory CRS by computed tomography and endoscopy and had received several surgical and medical treatments in the past, but their condition had not been cured. They were divided into the observation group (RESS through MAN–middle turbinate resection, n = 78) and the control group (endoscopic sinus surgery, n = 78). Complete or partial control of the patient’s symptoms and signs suggested that the treatment was effective, and no improvement in the symptoms and signs indicated that the treatment was ineffective. Results The 6-month treatment efficacy rate was significantly higher in the observation group (91.03%) than in the control group (71.79%). The observation group had a significantly lower complication rate (7.69%) and recurrence rate (3.85%) than the control group (17.95% and 12.82%, respectively). Conclusion RESS through MAN–middle turbinate resection together with adequate perioperative preparation has a significant effect on the outcome of refractory CRS and is worthy of clinical promotion.

Outcome and Complications of Frontal Sinus Stenting: A Case Presentation and Literature Review

Introduction. Frontal sinus surgery remains challenging to manage because of its complex anatomy and narrow outflow tract. A number of studies suggest the success of frontal sinus stenting to reduce postoperative complications in endoscopic frontal sinus surgery. However, failure and complications of frontal sinus stenting may occur. Method. We present a case of frontal sinus stenting with migration of the stent and erosion of the lamina papyracea together with a granulomatous reaction around the stent. PubMed and Medline search was also conducted to study the current evidence on frontal sinus stenting benefits and complications. Results. Still there are no guidelines or universally accepted indications for the use of frontal sinus stenting in the literature. A limited number of studies suggest the success of frontal sinus stenting to reduce postoperative stenosis in endoscopic frontal sinus surgery. However, failure and complications of frontal sinus stenting may occur. Infection, pain, edema, and stent obstruction may also occur. Our case report also highlights the potential of orbital complications as well as the consequences of inducing a granulomatous reaction. Conclusion. The value of frontal sinus stenting is still a subject of debate. Complications of frontal sinus stenting are not uncommon and thus necessitate regular follow-up.

Quality of Life Outcomes in Frontal Sinus Surgery

Introduction: Although significant experience has been gained in the technical nuances of endoscopic sinus surgery procedures, the patient-reported outcomes of frontal endoscopic sinus surgery procedures are still poorly understood. In this study we used the validated patient outcome measure Sino Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) to assess the preoperative and postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (Draf type 2 and Draf type 3 procedures). Methods: Out of a total of 680 patients undergoing endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery and 186 patients undergoing frontal sinus surgery, 99 chronic rhinosinusitis patients with (CRSwNP) or without (CRSnNP) nasal polyps undergoing Draf 2 or Draf 3 were assessed. Results: The mean preoperative SNOT-22 was 45.6 points for patients undergoing Draf 2 and 59 for patients undergoing Draf 3, while the mean radiological Lund–Mackay Score was 14.3 and 14.5, respectively. Mean SNOT 22 improvement was 22.9 points for Draf 2 and 37 points for Draf 3 respectively and remained significant in all time intervals, including at 4 years after surgery. With the exception of loss of smell/taste, all symptoms improved by a far bigger extent in Draf 3 group, despite the considerably worse starting point. Effect size (Cohen / Standard Deviations) of Draf 3 was greatest in the following symptoms: “being frustrated/restless/irritable” (1.63), “nasal blockage” (1.43), “reduced concentration” (1.35), “fatigue” (1.29) “runny nose” (1.26) and “need to blow nose” (1.17). Frontal sinus (neo) ostium was patent (fully or partly) at last follow up in 98% of Draf 2 patients and in 88% of patients following Draf 3. Patients with non-patent frontal (neo-) ostium however had a mean postoperative SNOT 22 score of 43 compared to 20 of those with patent frontal sinus (neo-) ostium, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Patients undergoing Draf 3 have a greater burden of disease, including both nasal and emotional/general symptoms compared to Draf 2 patients; surgery results in improvement in both groups, although Draf 3 patients have the greatest benefit, especially in emotional / general symptons. In this way both groups achieve similar postoperative quality of life, despite the different starting points.