Purpose of review: There is an incomplete understanding regarding the extent of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in managing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and its effect on outcomes. This study aimed to assess and compare limited sinus surgery, full-house, extended and radical ESS for optimizing CRS outcomes.
Recent findings: An online search in adherence with PRISMA guidelines was performed. Data were pooled for meta-analysis. Forty-six articles met inclusion criteria. Full-house ESS yielded greater improvements in SNOT-22 and endoscopy scores over limited ESS. Radical ESS improved nasal symptoms and reduced disease recurrence more than full house ESS, while extended ESS decreased revision ESS rates when compared to full-house ESS. Total ethmoidectomy reduced SNOT-22 scores more than limited ethmoidectomy. There was no difference in perioperative complications for all extents of ESS. When compared to limited ESS, full-house ESS yielded better patient symptom outcomes. Radical ESS demonstrated even greater reductions in nasal symptoms, while extended ESS additionally decreased revision surgery rates. Thus, in general, greater extent of ESS leads to better outcomes, while all extents of ESS are relatively safe.
Keywords: Endoscopic sinus surgery; Meta-analysis; Patient outcomes; Rhinology; Sinusitis.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.