Yu-Xiao Wu1, Min Wang2, Hui Li1, Zhi-Min Xing1, Mu-Han Shi1, Shi-En Huang1, Yan Liu1, Cong-Li Geng1. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Xi Zhi Men Nan Da Jie 11#, Beijing, 100044, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Xi Zhi Men Nan Da Jie 11#, Beijing, 100044, People's Republic of China. minwang333@sina.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Effective topical medications delivery to the frontal sinus is crucial to recovery from frontal sinusotomy. However, finding a way to deliver local medications to the frontal sinus is still a major challenge. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of various head positions on postoperative frontal sinus drug deposition. The safety and efficacy were also evaluated in postoperative chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients. METHODS: Full house surgery was performed on six fresh frozen cadaver heads. The fluorescein solution was dropped into the nasal sinuses in three different head positions, and the fluorescein deposition was evaluated. A prospective cohort study was performed to validate the results in 20 postoperative CRS patients. The cortisol level, symptom VAS and the frontal recess endoscopy scores were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: The frontal recess delivery of fluorescein was better in the Mygind and vertex-to-floor positions than in the head back position. The cortisol level of patients dropped markedly after taking oral methylprednisolone, but returned to baseline when replaced with budesonide drops. The pre- and postoperative symptom VAS scores did not differ significantly between the two groups. Endoscopic scores of the vertex-to-floor group were significantly better than those of the Mygind group. CONCLUSION: Both the Mygind and the vertex-to-floor head positions were optimal for delivery of topical medications to the frontal recess. When applying the steroid drops, both positions were found to be safe and associated with effective relief of symptoms. The vertex-to-floor position can better improve the endoscopic scores of frontal recess and frontal sinus.
PURPOSE: Effective topical medications delivery to the frontal sinus is crucial to recovery from frontal sinusotomy. However, finding a way to deliver local medications to the frontal sinus is still a major challenge. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of various head positions on postoperative frontal sinus drug deposition. The safety and efficacy were also evaluated in postoperative chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients. METHODS: Full house surgery was performed on six fresh frozen cadaver heads. The fluorescein solution was dropped into the nasal sinuses in three different head positions, and the fluorescein deposition was evaluated. A prospective cohort study was performed to validate the results in 20 postoperative CRSpatients. The cortisol level, symptom VAS and the frontal recess endoscopy scores were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: The frontal recess delivery of fluorescein was better in the Mygind and vertex-to-floor positions than in the head back position. The cortisol level of patients dropped markedly after taking oral methylprednisolone, but returned to baseline when replaced with budesonide drops. The pre- and postoperative symptom VAS scores did not differ significantly between the two groups. Endoscopic scores of the vertex-to-floor group were significantly better than those of the Mygind group. CONCLUSION: Both the Mygind and the vertex-to-floor head positions were optimal for delivery of topical medications to the frontal recess. When applying the steroid drops, both positions were found to be safe and associated with effective relief of symptoms. The vertex-to-floor position can better improve the endoscopic scores of frontal recess and frontal sinus.
Entities:
Keywords:
Application of steroids; CRS (chronic rhinosinusitis); Deposition; Frontal recess; Frontal sinus; Head position
Authors: Wytske J Fokkens; Valerie J Lund; Joachim Mullol; Claus Bachert; Isam Alobid; Fuad Baroody; Noam Cohen; Anders Cervin; Richard Douglas; Philippe Gevaert; Christos Georgalas; Herman Goossens; Richard Harvey; Peter Hellings; Claire Hopkins; Nick Jones; Guy Joos; Livije Kalogjera; Bob Kern; Marek Kowalski; David Price; Herbert Riechelmann; Rodney Schlosser; Brent Senior; Mike Thomas; Elina Toskala; Richard Voegels; De Yun Wang; Peter John Wormald Journal: Rhinology Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Al-Rahim R Habib; Andrew Thamboo; Jamil Manji; Rachelle C Dar Santos; Eng Cern Gan; Amy Anstead; Amin R Javer Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: J B Shi; Q L Fu; H Zhang; L Cheng; Y J Wang; D D Zhu; W Lv; S X Liu; P Z Li; C Q Ou; G Xu Journal: Allergy Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 13.146