FTD is associated with outer retina thinning, and this thinning correlates with disease severity.

Background Surgeons commonly prescribe prophylactic antibiotics after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), yet minimal data exist to support this practice. In this study we aimed to assess the impact of post‐ESS antibiotics on infection, quality of life (QOL), and endoscopic scores. Methods This was a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, noninferiority trial comparing amoxicillin‐clavulanate vs placebo after ESS (NCT01919411, ClinicalTrials.gov). Adults (N = 77) with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) refractory to appropriate medical therapy who underwent ESS were randomized to antibiotics (N = 37) or placebo (N = 40) and followed clinically (mean ± standard deviation: 1.3 ± 0.3 and 8.8 ± 3.9 weeks postoperatively). At baseline and follow‐up, QOL was measured with 22‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test questionnaires and Lund‐Kennedy endoscopic scores were evaluated. Outcomes were analyzed with repeated‐measures analysis of variance and analysis of covariance and z tests for proportions. Results Placebo was noninferior to antibiotic prophylaxis with regard to postoperative SNOT‐22 scores (β = 0.18, 2‐tailed p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the antibiotic and placebo groups in LK score trajectories over time (p = 0.63) or in postoperative infection rates (2.6% vs 2.4%, respectively; p = 0.96). The rate of diarrhea was significantly higher in the antibiotic group (24.3% vs 2.5%; relative risk = 10.8; p = 0.02). Conclusion Although statistically underpowered, the results suggest placebo was noninferior to prophylactic antibiotics after ESS for CRS regarding postoperative sinonasal‐specific QOL. There were no significant differences in postoperative endoscopic scores or rates of infection, but the rate of diarrhea was significantly higher in the antibiotic group. These findings add to the growing evidence that routine use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics does not improve outcomes post‐ESS and significantly increases the rate of diarrhea.

Objectives/Hypothesis: The recent addition of mandatory program-specific paragraphs within the personal statement during the otolaryngology match process has been controversial. It is unclear whether applicants customize these paragraphs for programs, or if they are largely uniform across applications. The objective of our study was to assess the degree of variability among program-specific paragraphs.Study Design: Retrospective cohort analysis.Methods: An analysis of deidentified program-specific paragraphs of 2016 otolaryngology residency applicants at two institutions was performed. Applicants who applied to both and had program-specific paragraphs were included. Paragraphs were assessed for 24 parameters, including quantitative content analysis. Subjective and objective similarity scores were assigned to each pair, using a five-point scale and Levenshtein distance function respectively. Differences between institutions were calculated using χ 2 and two-sided t tests.Results: Two hundred eight-five applications were reviewed, and 181 applied to both programs and had program-specific paragraphs. The median subjective similarity score among all paragraphs was "mildly similar" (2/5). The mean objective similarity score was 0.59. There were statistical differences between institutions in 13 parameters. One institution garnered more applicants who mentioned interest in research or global surgery (71.3% vs. 57.5%, P = .006; 17.7% vs. 4.4%, P < .0001, respectively), whereas the other attracted mention of clinical aspects and geographical ties (80.0% vs. 45.3%, P < .0001; 72.4% vs. 45.3%, P < .0001, respectively).Conclusions: Our study suggests that applicants tailor program-specific paragraphs to the individual residency programs. These findings may aid programs and students in understanding the role of this new element of the application.