Quentin Lisan1,2, Antoine Moya-Plana3, Pierre Bonfils1,2. 1. Faculté de Médecine Paris Descartes, Université Paris V, Paris, France. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, European Hospital Georges Pompidou, Paris, France. 3. Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Gustave Roussy Cancer Institute, Villejuif, France.
Abstract
Importance: The risk factors for the recurrence of sinonasal inverted papilloma are still unclear. Objective: To investigate the potential association between the Krouse classification and the recurrence rates of sinonasal inverted papilloma. Data Sources: The EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for the period January 1, 1964, through September 30, 2016, using the following search strategy: (paranasal sinuses [Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms] OR sinonasal [all fields]) AND (inverted papilloma [MeSH terms] OR (inverted [all fields] AND papilloma [all fields]). Study Selection: The inclusion criteria were (1) studies including sinonasal inverted papilloma only and no other forms of papillomas, such as oncocytic papilloma; (2) minimum follow-up of 1 year after the surgery; and (3) clear report of cases (recurrence) and controls according to the Krouse classification system or deducible from the full-text article. Literature search was performed by 2 reviewers. Of the 625 articles retrieved in the literature, 97 full-text articles were reviewed. Observational cohort studies or randomized controlled trials were included, and the following variables were extracted from full-text articles: authors of the study, publication year, follow-up data, and number of cases (recurrence) and controls (no recurrence) in each of the 4 stages of the Krouse classification system. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated, and data of included studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was recurrence after surgical removal of sinonasal inverted papilloma according to each stage of the Krouse classification system. Results: Thirteen studies comprising 1787 patients were analyzed. A significant increased risk of recurrence (51%) was highlighted for Krouse stage T3 disease when compared with stage T2 (pooled OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.09-2.09). No significant difference in risk of recurrence was found between Krouse stages T1 and T2 disease (pooled OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.63-2.04) or between stages T3 and T4 (pooled OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.72-2.26). Conclusions and Relevance: Inverted papillomas classified as stage T3 according to the Krouse classification system presented a 51% higher likelihood of recurrence. Head and neck surgeons must be aware of this higher likelihood of recurrence when planning and performing surgery for sinonasal inverted papilloma.
Importance: The risk factors for the recurrence of sinonasal inverted papilloma are still unclear. Objective: To investigate the potential association between the Krouse classification and the recurrence rates of sinonasal inverted papilloma. Data Sources: The EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched for the period January 1, 1964, through September 30, 2016, using the following search strategy: (paranasal sinuses [Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms] OR sinonasal [all fields]) AND (inverted papilloma [MeSH terms] OR (inverted [all fields] AND papilloma [all fields]). Study Selection: The inclusion criteria were (1) studies including sinonasal inverted papilloma only and no other forms of papillomas, such as oncocytic papilloma; (2) minimum follow-up of 1 year after the surgery; and (3) clear report of cases (recurrence) and controls according to the Krouse classification system or deducible from the full-text article. Literature search was performed by 2 reviewers. Of the 625 articles retrieved in the literature, 97 full-text articles were reviewed. Observational cohort studies or randomized controlled trials were included, and the following variables were extracted from full-text articles: authors of the study, publication year, follow-up data, and number of cases (recurrence) and controls (no recurrence) in each of the 4 stages of the Krouse classification system. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated, and data of included studies were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was recurrence after surgical removal of sinonasal inverted papilloma according to each stage of the Krouse classification system. Results: Thirteen studies comprising 1787 patients were analyzed. A significant increased risk of recurrence (51%) was highlighted for Krouse stage T3 disease when compared with stage T2 (pooled OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.09-2.09). No significant difference in risk of recurrence was found between Krouse stages T1 and T2 disease (pooled OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.63-2.04) or between stages T3 and T4 (pooled OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.72-2.26). Conclusions and Relevance: Inverted papillomas classified as stage T3 according to the Krouse classification system presented a 51% higher likelihood of recurrence. Head and neck surgeons must be aware of this higher likelihood of recurrence when planning and performing surgery for sinonasal inverted papilloma.
Authors: Ernesto Pasquini; Vittorio Sciarretta; Giovanni Farneti; Giovanni Carlo Modugno; A Rinaldi Ceroni Journal: Am J Otolaryngol Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.808
Authors: Valerie J Lund; Heinz Stammberger; Piero Nicolai; Paolo Castelnuovo; Tim Beal; Alfred Beham; Manuel Bernal-Sprekelsen; Hannes Braun; Paola Cappabianca; Ricardo Carrau; Luigi Cavallo; George Clarici; Wolfwang Draf; Felice Esposito; Juan Fernandez-Miranda; Wytske Fokkens; Paul Gardner; Verena Gellner; Henrik Hellquist; Phillipe Hermann; Werner Hosemann; David Howard; Nick Jones; Mark Jorissen; Amin Kassam; Daniel Kelly; Senta Kurschel-Lackner; Samuel Leong; Nancy McLaughlin; Roberto Maroldi; Amir Minovi; Michael Mokry; Metin Onerci; Yew Kwang Ong; Daniel Prevedello; Hesham Saleh; Dharambir S Sehti; Daniel Simmen; Carl Snyderman; Auturo Solares; Magaret Spittle; Aldo Stamm; Peter Tomazic; Matteo Trimarchi; Frank Unger; Peter-John Wormald; Adam Zanation Journal: Rhinol Suppl Date: 2010-06-01
Authors: Bradford A Woodworth; Geeta A Bhargave; James N Palmer; Alexander G Chiu; Noam A Cohen; Donald C Lanza; William E Bolger; David W Kennedy Journal: Am J Rhinol Date: 2007 Sep-Oct
Authors: Wang Xiao-Ting; Li Peng; Wei Xiu-Qing; Wang Hai-Bo; Pang Wen-Hui; Li Bing; Zhang Er-Peng; Shi Guang-Gang Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Juan R Gras-Cabrerizo; Joan R Montserrat-Gili; Humbert Massegur-Solench; Xavier León-Vintró; Julia De Juan; Josep M Fabra-Llopis Journal: Am J Rhinol Allergy Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.467
Authors: Jake J Lee; Lauren T Roland; Jordan J Licata; Hilary L P Orlowski; Pawina Jiramongkolchai; Jay F Piccirillo; Dorina Kallogjeri; Cristine N Klatt-Cromwell; Rebecca D Chernock; John S Schneider Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: M Fulla; T Szafarowski; J Frias-Gomez; B Quiros; O Clavero; M Gomà; M A Pavon; O Jurek-Matusiak; H R Lares; M Mañós; L Alemany; M Mena; X Gonzalez Journal: Head Neck Pathol Date: 2020-01-08