2016 Section 5 Green Book

Update on evidence based reviews in adult CRS

Surgical therapy for CRS Rhinologic literature over the last 30 years is rich with de- scriptions of surgical therapies, with some outcome data for individual methods. Current evidence indicates that stan- dard ESS provides clinically significant QOL improvements for CRS patients that have failed medical therapy. 14,15 Dif- ferent approaches, devices, and techniques have been de- scribed in an effort to reduce the significant morbidity as- sociated with CRS. Comparative efficacy is largely lacking, however, with knowledge gaps in extent of surgery, opti- mal ostial size, resection vs dilation, hemostasis methods, and postoperative packing. These and other areas would be well served by additional evidence and, where appropriate, a review of the available evidence with recommendations. Two recent EBRRs have examined surgically-related top- ics . Ramakrishnan et al. 16 examined the role of image guid- ance in ESS, specifically addressing the ability of this tech- nology to prevent complications and to improve outcomes. Rudmik et al. 17 reviewed the evidence pertaining to a num- ber of postoperative therapies following sinus surgery in order to provide recommendations for the most beneficial treatment strategy. IGS in ESS IGS has evolved to become a common adjunct to ESS but has been challenged as having little evidence to support it. Ramakrishnan et al. 16 addressed this topic in a recent EBRR, acknowledging the relative paucity of evidence and delineating the significant barriers to overcoming this gap. Six studies were included in their analysis of complica- tions associated with ESS; 4 were retrospective and 2 were prospective nonrandomized studies. The available evidence mostly showed nonsignificant trends and also showed some conflicting results. Due to the low incidence of complica- tions associated with ESS, most studies were significantly underpowered to show a clinical difference. With regard to complications, the EBRR found IGS to be a valuable option: Aggregate quality of evidence: C (Level 2b: 2 studies, Level 4: 4 studies). Benefit: Potential for fewer surgical complications, particularly severe complications; provides additional anatomic information, particularly for cases in which anatomy can be significantly obscured. Harm: Local skin irritation, potential for poor IGS reg- istration/calibration/accuracy; potential for more exten- sive surgery than otherwise necessary. Cost: Disposable supplies, equipment costs, possible ex- tra operating room (OR) time. Benefits-Harm assessment: Preponderance of benefit over harm. Value judgments: IGS can provide critical information, particularly in the setting of altered anatomy or severe disease; avoiding major complications is essential; ideal studies are neither practical nor feasible. Policy level: Option.

Recommendation for #2: LHB or LHL position when using low-volume devices, which will only reliably dis- tribute to the nasal cavity. Intervention. Only prescribe low-volume devices with concurrent education on the proper position in which to administer them. Effect of nasal anatomy. Nasal cavity anatomy and nasal congestion was seen to impact distribution of topical ther- apies. Five studies examined this effect, although only 1 addressed sinus delivery. In balancing the potential ben- efits and harms of altering nasal anatomy and/or using longstanding decongestants to improve topical medication delivery, the EBRR found data supporting this practice lacking. It therefore recommended high-volume delivery to overcome these effects: Aggregate quality of evidence. C (Level 3b: 1 study; Level 4: 4 studies). Benefit. High-volume irrigations are able to overcome anatomic variations in the nasal cavity and achieve si- nus delivery. Nasal cavity delivery with low-volume de- vices can be overcome with pharmacologic decongestion or LHL position. The impact of surgical correction of unfavorable nasal cavity anatomy upon delivery to the paranasal sinuses has not been studied. Harm. Achieving better delivery by using high-volume devices to overcome unfavorable nasal anatomy may be associated with side effects. Use of the LHL position to improve nasal cavity delivery of low-volume devices carries little harm. The impact of chronic topical vaso- constrictors upon nasal cavity delivery to the middle turbinate/middle meatus is not proven and may result in rhinitis medicamentosa. Cost. Optimal head position with low-volume devices or high-volume delivery devices to overcome unfavorable nasal cavity anatomy are low. Nasal surgery cost. Benefits-harm assessment. Proven benefit in using high- volume devices; optimal head position with low-volume devices has little harm. Value judgments. Chronic topical vasoconstrictor use or nasal surgery, in the absence of airflow obstruc- tion, is unproven and carries the risk for harm and cost. Recommendation level. Recommend for: Use of high- volume delivery devices to achieve sinus delivery in patients with unfavorable nasal anatomy. Option for: Short-term (3–4 days or less) use of topical vasocon- strictor to improve nasal cavity delivery in cases of turbinate hypertrophy. Recommend against: Long-term use of topical vasoconstrictor to improve nasal cavity delivery. Intervention. Educate patients with unfavorable nasal cavity anatomy regarding optimal delivery posi- tion/device depending upon the desired site of topical delivery.

International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, Vol. 4, No. S1, July 2014

42