Open AccessEndoscopic sinus surgery in patients with cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pulmonary function
Author(s) -
K.I. Macdonald,
A. Gipsman,
A. Magit,
M. Fandino,
E. Massoud,
I.J. Witterick,
Paul Hong
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
rhinology (amsterdam. online)/rhinology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.275
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1996-8604
pISSN - 0300-0729
DOI - 10.4193/rhino.11.271
Subject(s) - medicine , sinusitis , pulmonary function testing , rhinorrhea , meta analysis , surgery , prospective cohort study , functional endoscopic sinus surgery , cystic fibrosis , endoscopy , cohort study , cohort
Introduction: The role of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) is not clearly defined. Objective: TO perform a systematic review of subjective and objective outcomes of ESS in CF. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the keywords 'sinusitis,' 'sinus surgery,' 'nasal polyps' and 'cystic fibrosis.' The quality of papers was assessed using the NICE scoring scale. Outcomes included safety, subjective symptoms, objective endoscopy scores, days spent in hospital, courses of antibiotics, and pulmonary function tests (PFTs). Results: Nineteen studies involving 586 patients were included in the review. There were four prospective cohort trials, and three were rated as good quality. There were no major complications attributable to ESS. There was consistent evidence in four cohort studies of improved sinonasal symptoms, including nasal obstruction, facial pain, headaches, rhinorrhea and olfaction. Three studies reported conflicting results in post-operative endoscopy scores. Three studies showed a decrease in days spent in hospital, and two showed a significant decrease in courses of intravenous antibiotics. A recent study, however, did not show a difference in either days spent in hospital or courses of antibiotics. Pulmonary function tests were not improved by ESS in six cohort trials, and one small study found significant improvement. A meta-analysis of FEV1 scores confirmed no significant difference. Conclusion: THE most consistent findings of this review were that ESS in patients with CF is safe, produces symptomatic benefit, and does not consistently improve PFTs. There were more conflicting results with regards to endoscopy scores, days spent in hospital, and courses of intravenous antibiotics. Future prospective studies, utilizing validated quality of life, symptom and endoscopy scales, are needed to further elucidate the role of ESS in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis in CF patients.