Koskinen Anni, Lundberg Marie, Lilja Markus, Myller Jyri, Penttilä Matti, Huhtala Heini, Lee John M, Blomgren Karin, Toppila-Salmi Sanna
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 3835Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, 60667Päijät-Häme Central Hospital, Lahti, Finland.
Ear Nose Throat J. 2023 Mar;102(3):181-187. doi: 10.1177/0145561320986030. Epub 2021 Feb 19.
The aim of this controlled follow-up study was to compare the need for revision surgery, long-term efficacy, and satisfaction in chronic rhinosinusitis patients who had undergone maxillary sinus operation with either balloon sinuplasty or traditional endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) technique.
Thirty-nine ESS patients and 36 balloon patients of our previously described cohort, who had been primarily operated in 2008 to 2010, were contacted by phone. Symptoms, satisfaction, and need for revision surgery were asked. In addition, we collected data of patients who had undergone primary maxillary sinus balloon sinuplasty in the Helsinki University Hospital during the years 2005 to 2019. As a control group, we collected data of patients who had undergone primary maxillary sinus ESS at 3 Finnish University Hospitals, and 1 Central Hospital in years 2005, 2008, and 2011.
Altogether, 77 balloon patients and 82 ESS patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 5.3 years in balloon group and 9.8 years in ESS group. Revision surgery was performed on 17 balloon patients and 6 ESS patients. In the survival analysis, the balloon sinuplasty associated significantly with a higher risk of revision surgery compared to ESS. According to the phone interviews, 82% of ESS patients and 75% of balloon patients were very satisfied with the primary operation.
Although the patient groups expressed equal satisfaction and change in symptoms after the operations, the need for revision surgery was higher after balloon sinuplasty than after ESS. This should be emphasized when counselling patients regarding surgical options.
这项对照随访研究的目的是比较接受上颌窦球囊鼻窦成形术或传统鼻内镜鼻窦手术（ESS）的慢性鼻窦炎患者的翻修手术需求、长期疗效和满意度。
通过电话联系了我们之前描述队列中的39例ESS患者和36例球囊手术患者，他们于2008年至2010年接受了初次手术。询问了症状、满意度和翻修手术需求。此外，我们收集了2005年至2019年在赫尔辛基大学医院接受初次上颌窦球囊鼻窦成形术患者的数据。作为对照组，我们收集了2005年、2008年和2011年在3家芬兰大学医院和1家中心医院接受初次上颌窦ESS患者的数据。
共纳入77例球囊手术患者和82例ESS患者。球囊组的平均随访时间为5.3年，ESS组为9.8年。17例球囊手术患者和6例ESS患者接受了翻修手术。在生存分析中，与ESS相比，球囊鼻窦成形术与更高的翻修手术风险显著相关。根据电话访谈，82%的ESS患者和75%的球囊手术患者对初次手术非常满意。
尽管两组患者术后的满意度和症状变化相同，但球囊鼻窦成形术后的翻修手术需求高于ESS术后。在为患者提供手术选择咨询时应强调这一点。
