- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Faculty Research and Publications /
- What is the optimal outcome after endoscopic sinus...
Open Collections
UBC Faculty Research and Publications
What is the optimal outcome after endoscopic sinus surgery in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis? A consultation of Canadian experts Saydy, Nadim; Moubayed, Sami P.; Bussières, Marie; Janjua, Arif; Kilty, Shaun; Lavigne, François; Monteiro, Eric; Nayan, Smriti; Piché, Marilou; Smith, Kristine; Sommer, Doron; Sowerby, Leigh; Tewfik, Marc A.; Witterick, Ian J.; Wright, Erin; Desrosiers, Martin
Abstract
Objectives Many experts feel that in the absence of well-defined goals for success, they have an easier time identifying failure. As success ought to not be defined only by absence of failure, we aimed to define optimal outcomes for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) by obtaining expert surgeon perspectives. Methods A total of 12 surgeons participated in this targeted consultation. Face to face semi-structured interviews were performed with expert surgeons in the field of CRS and ESS. General impressions and personal definitions of acceptable operative success and optimal operative outcomes were compiled and summarized. Results According to an expert survey, patients’ main objectives are an improvement in their chief complain, a general improvement in quality of life (QoL), and a better overall symptomatic control. The most important aspects of endoscopy for defining a successful intervention were an adequate mucus circulation, a healthy mucosa, minimal edema, and patency of all explored cavities or ostia. In the assessment of surgical outcomes, it was determined that both objective and patient reported data must be carefully examined, with more attention given to subjective outcomes. Conclusions According to data gathered from a Canadian expert consultation, a definition of success must be based on both subjective data and nasal endoscopy. We propose to define an acceptable outcome as either a subjective improvement of at least the minimal clinically improvement difference of a validated patient reported outcome questionnaire, along with a satisfactory endoscopic result (1) or a complete subjective resolution with a sub-optimal endoscopy (2). Graphical abstract
Item Metadata
Title |
What is the optimal outcome after endoscopic sinus surgery in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis? A consultation of Canadian experts
|
Creator | |
Contributor | |
Publisher |
BioMed Central
|
Date Issued |
2021-06-16
|
Description |
Objectives
Many experts feel that in the absence of well-defined goals for success, they have an easier time identifying failure. As success ought to not be defined only by absence of failure, we aimed to define optimal outcomes for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) by obtaining expert surgeon perspectives.
Methods
A total of 12 surgeons participated in this targeted consultation. Face to face semi-structured interviews were performed with expert surgeons in the field of CRS and ESS. General impressions and personal definitions of acceptable operative success and optimal operative outcomes were compiled and summarized.
Results
According to an expert survey, patients’ main objectives are an improvement in their chief complain, a general improvement in quality of life (QoL), and a better overall symptomatic control. The most important aspects of endoscopy for defining a successful intervention were an adequate mucus circulation, a healthy mucosa, minimal edema, and patency of all explored cavities or ostia. In the assessment of surgical outcomes, it was determined that both objective and patient reported data must be carefully examined, with more attention given to subjective outcomes.
Conclusions
According to data gathered from a Canadian expert consultation, a definition of success must be based on both subjective data and nasal endoscopy. We propose to define an acceptable outcome as either a subjective improvement of at least the minimal clinically improvement difference of a validated patient reported outcome questionnaire, along with a satisfactory endoscopic result (1) or a complete subjective resolution with a sub-optimal endoscopy (2).
Graphical abstract
|
Subject | |
Genre | |
Type | |
Language |
eng
|
Date Available |
2021-06-23
|
Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
Rights |
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
|
DOI |
10.14288/1.0398504
|
URI | |
Affiliation | |
Citation |
Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery. 2021 Jun 16;50(1):36
|
Publisher DOI |
10.1186/s40463-021-00519-9
|
Peer Review Status |
Reviewed
|
Scholarly Level |
Faculty
|
Copyright Holder |
The Author(s)
|
Rights URI | |
Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)