These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Use of balloon catheter dilation vs. traditional endoscopic sinus surgery in management of light and severe chronic rhinosinusitis of the frontal sinus: a multicenter prospective randomized study.
    Author: Minni A, Dragonetti A, Sciuto A, Cavaliere C, Rosati D, Azimonti D, Franzetti A.
    Journal: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2018 Jan; 22(2):285-293. PubMed ID: 29424885.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) of the frontal sinus is a complex pathological condition and many surgical techniques were described to treat this area endoscopically, like traditional endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and balloon catheter dilation (BCD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We designed a multicenter prospective randomized study to assess the validity and safety of BCD vs. ESS in symptomatological chronic rhinosinusitis of the frontal sinus enrolling a population of 102 adult patients (64 men and 38 women; overall 148 frontal sinuses studied) with non-polypoid CRS. For a better evaluation of the disease, in our study we decided to analyze both radiological (Lund-McKay CT scoring modified by Zinreich) and symptomatological results (SNOT-20 questionnaire). We divided the population affected in two groups, one with light/mild frontal CRS and the other with moderate/severe frontal CRS, basing on radiological findings at Lund-MacKay modified by Zinreich score. Every group was divided in two subgroups, in one we used BCD and in the other we used traditional ESS. RESULTS: The current literature does not support the suggestion that indications for BCD and ESS are identical, and additional research is needed to determine the role for BCD in specific patient populations. The results showed a not statistically significative difference between BCD and conventional ESS of the frontal sinus in patients with light/mild CRS and in patients with moderate/severe CRS at Lund-Mackay modified by Zinreich score. The same not statistically significative difference was observed comparing the results of SNOT-20 questionnaire in the group of light/mild frontal chronic rhinosinusitis. However, we noticed a statistically significant better outcome of SNOT-20 score in patients with moderate/severe chronic rhinosinusitis that underwent BCD of frontal sinus compared to ESS. CONCLUSIONS: BCD and ESS are two alternative weapons in the baggage of every endoscopic surgeon, even because they present similar outcomes, safeness and effectiveness both in light/mild and moderate/severe chronic rhinosinusitis of the frontal sinus. An interesting result of our study was the statistically significant better outcome of SNOT-20 score in patients that underwent BCD of frontal sinus for a moderate/severe CRS, compared to those that underwent a traditional ESS.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]