Literature DB >> 27080452

Gender-specific analysis of outcomes from endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis.

Devyani Lal1, Kimberly B Golisch2, Zachary A Elwell3, Rohit D Divekar4, Matthew A Rank5, Yu-Hui Chang6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women electing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) report higher symptom burden but have lower computed tomography (CT) scores. Gender-specific analysis of outcomes from ESS therefore merits further study. The objective of this work was to study gender-specific differences in outcomes from ESS for CRS by analyzing preoperative and postoperative 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores.
METHODS: Data from adult CRS patients electing ESS (2011-2013) were retrospectively collected. SNOT-22 total, rhinologic/nonrhinologic subdomain, and individual item scores were analyzed for gender-specific differences.
RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-eight patients met study criteria (mean age 55.4 years; 49.6% female). Preoperatively, mean Lund-Mackay CT score was 11.1; average total SNOT-22 score was 41.9. Compared to men, women had lower CT score (10.2 vs 12.0; p = 0.004) but higher total SNOT-22 score (44.7 vs 39.1; p = 0.02). Both genders showed significant improvement in total SNOT-22 scores at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months following ESS (p < 0.001), with largely similar slopes of improvement. The greatest improvement occurred at 3 months (SNOT-22 decreased by 25.4 points), with stable improvement after 12 months (SNOT-22 decreased by 21.3 points). Higher total SNOT-22 scores in females were noted preoperatively and until 6 months post-ESS; these were driven by rhinologic and nonrhinologic-otolaryngic subdomain items. No gender differences in anxiety/depression prevalence or psychological subdomain scores were noted preoperatively or postoperatively.
CONCLUSION: Both male and female CRS patients showed significant and durable symptom relief following ESS. Women reported higher symptom burden prior to surgery, and in the early postoperative period. However, after 1-year post-ESS, both genders showed similar symptom scores. The trend and magnitude of improvement were similar in both genders.
© 2016 ARS-AAOA, LLC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chronic rhinosinusitis; chronic sinusitis; endoscopic sinus surgery; gender; outcome

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27080452     DOI: 10.1002/alr.21773

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol        ISSN: 2042-6976            Impact factor:   3.858


  5 in total

1.  Long-term revision rates for endoscopic sinus surgery.

Authors:  Kristine A Smith; Richard R Orlandi; Gretchen Oakley; Huong Meeks; Karen Curtin; Jeremiah A Alt
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 3.858

Review 2.  Sino-Nasal outcome test-22 outcomes after sinus surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zachary M Soler; Rabun Jones; Phong Le; Luke Rudmik; Jose L Mattos; Shaun A Nguyen; Rodney J Schlosser
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  Advanced age adversely affects chronic rhinosinusitis surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Kristen L Yancey; Anne S Lowery; Rakesh K Chandra; Naweed I Chowdhury; Justin H Turner
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 3.858

4.  Differences in men and women suffering from CRSwNP and AERD in quality of life.

Authors:  Tina J Bartosik; David T Liu; Nicholas J Campion; Sergio Villazala-Merino; Stefan Janik; Valerie Dahm; Christian A Mueller; Erich Vyskocil; Victoria Stanek; Tamara Quint; Christine Bangert; Julia Eckl-Dorna; Sven Schneider
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Radiographic disease severity in chronic rhinosinusitis patients and health care utilization.

Authors:  Mitesh P Mehta; Kevin Hur; Caroline P E Price; Stephanie Shintani-Smith; Kevin C Welch; David B Conley; Robert C Kern; Bruce K Tan
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-09-18
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.