Laryngo-rhino-otologie最新文献

Part II of the S3 guideline report deals with the surgical treatment of hypopharyngeal carcinoma, neck dissection for oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinomas and adjuvant therapy options. Primary surgical therapy ± adjuvant radio- or radiochemotherapy and primary radio- or radiochemotherapy are established as primary therapies for local-regional hypopharyngeal carcinomas. Direct randomized comparisons of both basic therapeutic procedures were never conducted. Available registry data show a worse prognosis of hypopharyngeal carcinoma compared to oropharyngeal carcinomas in all locoregional tumor stages, regardless of the treatment method. For T1N0-T2N0 squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx, there are no relevant differences in overall survival and locoregional relapse rate between primary surgical and primary non-surgical treatment. Primary surgical therapy ± adjuvant radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy and primary radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy are established as primary therapies for advanced but locoregionally limited hypopharyngeal carcinomas. Neck dissection is an integral part of the primary surgical treatment of oropharyngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer. There are only a few randomized studies on non-surgical organ preservation for advanced hypopharyngeal cancer as an alternative to pharyngolaryngectomy, but these have led to the recommendation of alternative concepts in the new guideline. The indication and implementation of postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy and radiochemotherapy for hypopharyngeal carcinoma do not differ from those for HPV/p16-negative and -positive oropharyngeal carcinoma.

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has a negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is the treatment of choice for those not responding to medical treatments. To date, the short-term effects of FESS on HRQoL are still unclear.

Objective: Evaluation of the short-term effects of FESS on HRQoL in CRS patients using the SNOT-22 questionnaire.

Methods: The results of the validated German version of the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire were analysed from 89 patients with CRS before surgery and 10-14 days (n = 77), four (n = 77), six weeks (n = 76) and 6 months (n = 71) after FESS, and compared with those of 1,000 healthy controls selected using a non-probability quota sample in accordance to the distribution of the German Microcensus.

Results: Compared to the preoperative mean SNOT-22 score (47.35), CRS patients significantly improved in HRQoL 10-14 days (31.75, p < 0.01), 4 weeks (25.84, p < 0.01), 6 weeks (24.16, p < 0.01) and 6 months after FESS (27.16, p < 0.01). Pre- and 6 months postoperatively, the five most important SNOT-22 items were nasal obstruction, smell and taste reduction, thick, mucous nasal secretions, need to blow the nose and postnasal drip. At the 2, 4 and 6-week follow-up, the reduction in smell and taste was most frequently perceived as limiting the HRQoL.

Conclusions: This follow-up study shows for the first time that the reduction in smell and taste should be treated and controlled concervatively in the short term after FESS.

Objective: Currently, there is an intensive discussion on advancing and expanding outpatient rhinosurgical procedures. Many questions about how to stratify into out- and inpatient procedures are still not sufficiently clarified. Particularly, the use of nasal packing materials is not adequately discussed.

Material and methods: Development of a checklist to stratify sinunasal procedures into in- or outpatient procedures with consideration of current scientific literature and risk factors.

Results and conclusions: After comprehensive assessment of the literature and analysis of specific risk factors, a list of sinunasal procedures is presented, which should be performed as inpatient procedures. We present a checklist for in- and outpatient sinunasal procedures, which considers social, medical and surgical factors as well as the use of nasal packing materials. Furthermore, a checklist is added to assess, whether patients are ready for discharge after a planned outpatient procedure.

Objective: Currently, there is an intensive discussion about enhancing and expanding outpatient rhinosurgical procedures. Many questions about how to stratify into out- and inpatient procedures are still not sufficiently clarified. Particularly, the use of nasal packing materials is not adequately discussed.

Material and methods: We performed a Germany-wide survey among otorhinolaryngologists regarding the use of nasal packing materials in sinonasal surgery. Additionally, we asked for any complication in relation to nasal packing.

Results: In 85,6% nasal packing was used for septal and turbinate surgery at least occasionally, in 44,2% always. In sinus surgery these numbers are 94,1% and 49%, respectively. Non-resorbable nasal packing materials were predominantly used.Most frequent complications were bleeding with nasal packing in situ (> 50% of respondents) and posterior dislocation (24% of respondents), requiring emergency treatment. Death was listed in 5 patients. One patient suffered from permanent brain damage due to hypoxia.

Conclusions: Application of non-resorbable nasal packing materials with occlusion of the nasal cavity carry a substantial risk of complications, which necessitate emergency treatment, thus requiring inpatient care.

Epistaxis is one of the most common emergencies in otorhinolaryngology. The spectrum ranges from mild, self-limiting cases to life-threatening hemorrhages. Depending on the severity and course of the condition, management can be either outpatient or involve inpatient monitoring, possibly with surgical treatment.A retrospective systematic evaluation was conducted on all outpatient and inpatient patient data diagnosed with epistaxis from January to December 2021. Epistaxis associated with tumors, trauma, and postoperative epistaxis were excluded.A total of 707 patients were included. Seasonally, the highest number of patients presented in January. Outpatient management was possible for 80.8% of the cases, while 19.2% required inpatient admission. Among the inpatients, 15.4% required surgical intervention. Within the entire study cohort, 61.1% of the patients were male. Among the inpatients who underwent surgical treatment, the proportion of male patients was even higher (81.0%). The majority (73.1%) of the inpatients were on at least one anticoagulant medication. Advanced age (p=0.044) and the presence of posterior epistaxis (p<0.001) were significantly associated with the need for inpatient treatment. No children required inpatient care.Epistaxis is a common condition in otorhinolaryngology, predominantly affecting older male patients and those on anticoagulant therapy in severe cases within the studied cohort. Surgical intervention under general anesthesia was infrequently necessary for the treatment of epistaxis in the overall study population (3%).