xRead - Nasal Obstruction (September 2024) Full Articles

20426984, 0, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alr.23262, Wiley Online Library on [02/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

86

KUANetal.

TABLE X.7 Evidence surrounding open versus endoscopic maxillary sinus approaches.

Clinical endpoints Recurrence

Study

Year LOE Study design Study groups

Conclusion

Lawsonand Patel 317

2009 3

Retrospective cohort

200 IP patients

1. IP should be addressed

endoscopically when possible 2. When access is limited via endoscopic approach, external approaches should be used to ensure complete tumor control 1. Endo-based approaches can be performed in a majority of IP cases, with recurrence rates similar to open approaches 2. Endo-based approaches take less operative time, have shorter LOS, and have fewer complications PLA reduces recurrence and has similar rates of complications in maxillary IP recurrence and complication than open approaches 2. PLA is a minimally invasive, safe, and effective method for maxillary sinus IP Endoscopic approaches alone can access most IP tumors and achieve low recurrence rates Endo and endo-assisted approaches can be tailored to the tumor extent with low IP recurrence rates 1. Endo approaches were primarily used in lower stage tumors 2. Endo approaches had low recurrent rates in early-stage tumors 3. Combined internal and external approaches were used in advanced cases and cannot be compared to endoscopic approaches 4. Endo approaches had lower complication rates 1. 30% patients with maxillary sinus IP had recurrence requiring additional procedures 2. Anterior wall maxillary IP are more likely to recur than posterior locations within the sinus 1. Endoscopic approaches achieved similar or better

Kimet al. 301

2008 3

Retrospective cohort

136 IP patients Endo + endo-assisted ( n = 94) Open ( n = 42)

1. Recurrence 2. Complications 3. LOS 4. Operative time

2020 4 a

Nakayama et al. 318

Retrospective cohort

45 IP patients

1. Recurrence 2. Complications

Yuet al. 309

2018 4 a

Retrospective cohort

71 patients with maxillary IP

1. Recurrence 2. Complications

Nikakhlagh et al. 319

2015 4

Retrospective case series

38 IP patients

Recurrence

2010 4 a

Lombardi et al. 320

Retrospective cohort

212 IP patients Endo ( n = 198) Endo + open ( n = 14) 56 IP patients Endo ( n = 23) Endo-assisted ( n = 14) Open ( n = 19)

Recurrence

Durucu et al. 300

2009 4 a

1. Recurrence 2. Complications

Retrospective cohort

2009 4 a

Shamet al. 321

Retrospective cohort

27 IP patients

Recurrence

Abbreviations: IP, inverted papilloma; LOS, length of stay; PLA, prelacrimal approach. a LOE downgraded for lack of controlling for confounding factors.