Georgalas Christos, Detsis Marios, Geramas Ioannis, Terzakis Dimitris, Liodakis Andreas
Department of Surgery-Head and Neck, Medical School, University of Nicosia, Nicosia 2408, Cyprus.
Endoscopic Sinus and Skull Base Surgery-Athens (ESA), Hygeia Hospital, Erythrou Stavrou 4, Maroussi, 15123 Athens, Greece.
J Clin Med. 2020 Jul 8;9(7):2145. doi: 10.3390/jcm9072145.
Although significant experience has been gained in the technical nuances of endoscopic sinus surgery procedures, the patient-reported outcomes of frontal endoscopic sinus surgery procedures are still poorly understood. In this study we used the validated patient outcome measure Sino Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) to assess the preoperative and postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing extended endoscopic frontal sinus surgery (Draf type 2 and Draf type 3 procedures).
Out of a total of 680 patients undergoing endoscopic sinus and skull base surgery and 186 patients undergoing frontal sinus surgery, 99 chronic rhinosinusitis patients with (CRSwNP) or without (CRSnNP) nasal polyps undergoing Draf 2 or Draf 3 were assessed.
The mean preoperative SNOT-22 was 45.6 points for patients undergoing Draf 2 and 59 for patients undergoing Draf 3, while the mean radiological Lund-Mackay Score was 14.3 and 14.5, respectively. Mean SNOT 22 improvement was 22.9 points for Draf 2 and 37 points for Draf 3 respectively and remained significant in all time intervals, including at 4 years after surgery. With the exception of loss of smell/taste, all symptoms improved by a far bigger extent in Draf 3 group, despite the considerably worse starting point. Effect size (Cohen / Standard Deviations) of Draf 3 was greatest in the following symptoms: "being frustrated/restless/irritable" (1.63), "nasal blockage" (1.43), "reduced concentration" (1.35), "fatigue" (1.29) "runny nose" (1.26) and "need to blow nose" (1.17). Frontal sinus (neo) ostium was patent (fully or partly) at last follow up in 98% of Draf 2 patients and in 88% of patients following Draf 3. Patients with non-patent frontal (neo-) ostium however had a mean postoperative SNOT 22 score of 43 compared to 20 of those with patent frontal sinus (neo-) ostium, although the difference was not statistically significant.
Patients undergoing Draf 3 have a greater burden of disease, including both nasal and emotional/general symptoms compared to Draf 2 patients; surgery results in improvement in both groups, although Draf 3 patients have the greatest benefit, especially in emotional / general symptons. In this way both groups achieve similar postoperative quality of life, despite the different starting points.
尽管在内镜鼻窦手术的技术细节方面已经积累了丰富的经验,但对于额窦内镜手术患者报告的结局仍知之甚少。在本研究中,我们使用经过验证的患者结局测量工具——鼻窦结局测试-22(SNOT-22),来评估接受扩大内镜额窦手术(Draf 2型和Draf 3型手术)患者的术前和术后生活质量。
在总共680例接受内镜鼻窦和颅底手术的患者以及186例接受额窦手术的患者中,对99例患有(CRSwNP)或未患有(CRSnNP)鼻息肉且接受Draf 2或Draf 3手术的慢性鼻窦炎患者进行了评估。
接受Draf 2手术患者的术前SNOT-22平均分为45.6分,接受Draf 3手术患者的术前SNOT-22平均分为59分,而平均放射学Lund-Mackay评分为14.3分和14.5分。Draf 2手术患者的SNOT 22平均改善了22.9分,Draf 3手术患者的平均改善了37分,并且在所有时间段均保持显著改善,包括术后4年。除嗅觉/味觉丧失外,尽管Draf 3组的起始点差得多,但所有症状在该组中的改善程度都要大得多。Draf 3手术在以下症状中的效应量(Cohen/标准差)最大:“沮丧/烦躁/易怒”(1.63)、“鼻塞”(1.43)、“注意力不集中”(1.35)、“疲劳”(1.29)、“流鼻涕”(1.26)和“需要擤鼻涕”(1.17)。在最后一次随访时,98%的Draf 2手术患者和88%的Draf 3手术患者的额窦(新)开口通畅(完全或部分)。然而,额窦(新)开口不通畅的患者术后SNOT 22平均评分为43分,而额窦(新)开口通畅的患者为20分,尽管差异无统计学意义。
与Draf 2手术患者相比,接受Draf 3手术的患者疾病负担更重,包括鼻腔症状以及情绪/全身症状;手术使两组患者的症状均得到改善,尽管Draf 3手术患者获益最大,尤其是在情绪/全身症状方面。通过这种方式,尽管起始点不同,但两组患者术后的生活质量相似。