We have located links that may give you full text access.
Draf IIB with superior septectomy: finding the "middle ground".
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology 2018 December 13
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated a high failure rate of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) with Draf IIa in patients with diffuse polyposis, asthma, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. A high percentage of these patients progress to endoscopic modified Lothrop procedure (EMLP). We describe a modification of the Draf IIb with a superior septectomy (IIb+SS), which may provide similar therapeutic benefit as demonstrated by the distribution of sinus irrigations in the sinus cavity with ESS with IIb+SS vs ESS with EMLP IIb+SS vs ESS with EMLP.
METHODS: ESS with IIb+SS was performed on 6 cadaver heads. Fluorescein-dyed irrigations were performed on each head and penetration was recorded using video endoscopy. EMLP was subsequently performed on each head with repeat dye-irrigation and video endoscopy. The videos were reviewed by 4 blinded fellowship-trained rhinologists, and irrigant penetration of the maxillary, ethmoid, frontal, sphenoid sinuses, and olfactory cleft was graded 0 to 3 (3 implying complete staining).
RESULTS: The mean scores when comparing IIb+SS to EMLP were as follows: overall 1.99 vs 1.97 (p = 0.816), maxillary sinus 2.67 vs 2.38 (p = 0.128), ethmoid sinus 1.88 vs 1.98 (p = 0.536), sphenoid sinus 2.58 vs 2.50 (p = 0.467), frontal sinus 1.13 vs 1.38 (p = 0.073), and olfactory cleft 1.71 vs 1.63 (p = 0.529). There was no significant difference between subsites. Interrater reliability was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.781).
CONCLUSION: Performing ESS with IIb+SS provides similar irrigation delivery benefits to ESS with EMLP, without the need for altering natural sinus outflow and creating circumferential scarring. Further studies evaluating its use in patients that are high risk for revision surgery are needed.
METHODS: ESS with IIb+SS was performed on 6 cadaver heads. Fluorescein-dyed irrigations were performed on each head and penetration was recorded using video endoscopy. EMLP was subsequently performed on each head with repeat dye-irrigation and video endoscopy. The videos were reviewed by 4 blinded fellowship-trained rhinologists, and irrigant penetration of the maxillary, ethmoid, frontal, sphenoid sinuses, and olfactory cleft was graded 0 to 3 (3 implying complete staining).
RESULTS: The mean scores when comparing IIb+SS to EMLP were as follows: overall 1.99 vs 1.97 (p = 0.816), maxillary sinus 2.67 vs 2.38 (p = 0.128), ethmoid sinus 1.88 vs 1.98 (p = 0.536), sphenoid sinus 2.58 vs 2.50 (p = 0.467), frontal sinus 1.13 vs 1.38 (p = 0.073), and olfactory cleft 1.71 vs 1.63 (p = 0.529). There was no significant difference between subsites. Interrater reliability was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.781).
CONCLUSION: Performing ESS with IIb+SS provides similar irrigation delivery benefits to ESS with EMLP, without the need for altering natural sinus outflow and creating circumferential scarring. Further studies evaluating its use in patients that are high risk for revision surgery are needed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app