Objectives Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is more common than historically reported, and management recommendations are limited in the literature. Although ODS case series have shown successful outcomes with dental treatment and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), no studies have considered the optimal timing of these treatments. The purpose of this study was to analyze times to ODS resolution after primary dental treatment and ESS based on symptom, 22‐item sinonasal outcome test (SNOT‐22), and endoscopic outcomes. Study Design Prospective cohort study. Methods Thirty‐seven symptomatic ODS patients who failed medical management were offered primary dental treatment or ESS. Eleven patients selected primary dental treatment, and 26 patients selected ESS. The following variables were collected prospectively at every office visit before and after dental treatment or ESS: SNOT‐22, presence or absence of cardinal sinusitis symptoms, and presence or absence of middle meatal endoscopy findings (edema, polyps, purulence). Times to resolution of these clinical variables were analyzed with t test, chi‐square test, Fisher exact test, McNemar test, and Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis. Results Patients in the dental treatment and ESS groups showed no significant differences in preoperative sinusitis disease burdens based on symptoms, SNOT‐22, endoscopy, and computed tomography. The ESS group experienced faster and more significant improvement in nearly all symptom, SNOT‐22, and endoscopic outcomes. Conclusions For symptomatic ODS, primary ESS resulted in faster resolution of SNOT‐22, sinusitis symptoms, and endoscopic findings in ODS patients compared with primary dental treatment. ESS can be considered first‐line therapy for symptomatic ODS, followed by dental treatment when necessary. Level of Evidence 2b Laryngoscope, 129:1976–1983, 2019

Objectives/Hypothesis: To determine the usefulness and the costs of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of patients with dizziness in the emergency department (ED).Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Charts of patients with a specific health maintenance insurance plan presenting with dizziness and vertigo to a large health system's ED between January 2008 and January 2011 were reviewed. Patient demographics, signs/symptoms, and CT and MRI results were assessed. CT and MRI charges were determined based on positive versus unremarkable findings. Data analysis included stepwise logistic regressions.Results: Of 1681 patients identified, 810 (48%) received CT brain/head scan totaling $988,200 in charges. Of these, only 0.74% yielded clinically significant pathology requiring intervention. However, 12.2% of MRI studies yielded discovery of significant abnormalities. Logistic regression analysis revealed that older patients (P ¼ .001) were more likely to receive a CT scan.Conclusions: In the 3-year period studied, CT scans for ED patients with dizziness and vertigo yielded a low predictive value for significant pathology. These data reveal a great opportunity for cost savings by developing stricter guidelines for ordering CT scans for this set of ED patients. The use of MRI in all cases of dizziness was found to be neither practical nor useful. However, appropriately directed MRI of the brain is recommended in patients with dizziness and other neurological signs or symptoms.

Background: Unilateral sinus disease (USD) carries a broader differential diagnosis than bilateral sinus disease, including various inflammatory and neoplastic conditions. Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is a common cause of unilateral maxillary sinusitis, but few studies have examined its incidence among all USD etiologies. The main purposes of this prospective study were to determine the incidences of ODS and other etiologies causing USD with complete maxillary sinus opacification on computed tomography (CT), and to compare CT features of ODS and non-odontogenic USD patients. In addition, clinical features of the ODS cohort are described.Methods: A prospective case series of 134 patients with USD with complete maxillary sinus opacification on CT was conducted from August 2015 to November 2018. Based on nasal endoscopy, sinus CT, and dental examination and imaging, patients were categorized as having unilateral ODS or non-odontogenic USD. Patients with nonodontogenic USD were categorized as inflammatory or neoplastic. Demographic and clinical data were reported for ODS patients. Results:Of the 134 patients, 45% had ODS, 36% had nonodontogenic inflammatory conditions, 17% had inverted papilloma, and 2% had malignancies. Of the 60 ODS cases, 86.7% were associated with middle meatal purulence on nasal endoscopy. On CT, 88.3% had extramaxillary sinus disease extension, and 65.5% of CT reports made no mention of dental pathology. Conclusion:ODS caused nearly 50% of all USD cases with maxillary sinus opacification on CT, and was the most common individual etiology. ODS was frequently associated with anterior ethmoid and frontal sinus disease on CT, and middle meatal purulence on nasal endoscopy. C 2019 ARS-AAOA, LLC.

Local anatomic variations surrounding and overlying a subtle lung nodule on a chest radiograph that are created by the projection of anatomic features in the thorax, such as ribs and pulmonary vessels, can greatly influence the detection of nodules, altering the Az by as much as 28%.

BackgroundBacterial odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is distinct from other forms of rhinosinusitis. Diagnosing ODS can be challenging because of nonspecific clinical presentations and underrepresentation in the literature. The purpose of this study was to compare maxillary sinus bacterial cultures between patients with ODS and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), to determine whether certain bacteria are associated with ODS.MethodsThis was a retrospective case‐control study of 276 consecutive patients from August 2015 to August 2019 who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for bacterial ODS, CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP), or CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). When present, pus was sterilely cultured from maxillary sinuses after maxillary antrostomy, and aerobic and anaerobic cultures were immediately sent for processing. Demographics and culture results were compared between ODS and CRS patients, and then separately between ODS and CRSsNP, and ODS and CRSwNP. ODS culture results were also compared between different dental pathologies (endodontic vs oroantral fistula).ResultsThe following bacteria were significantly more likely in ODS compared to CRS: mixed anaerobes, Fusobacterium spp., Eikenella corrodens, Streptococcus intermedius, Streptococcus anginosus, and Streptococcus constellatus. Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were inversely related to ODS. There were no significant differences in cultures between the different dental pathologies.ConclusionCertain bacteria were more likely to be associated with ODS compared to CRS when purulence was cultured from the maxillary sinus. Physicians should evaluate for an odontogenic source of sinusitis when these ODS‐associated bacteria are identified in maxillary sinus cultures.