Background Scholarly productivity and research output vary among different subspecialties. The h-index was developed as a more wholesome metric that measures an author's contribution to literature. Objective Through a web-based cross-sectional analysis, we investigated the differences in scholarly impact and influence of both fellowship and nonfellowship-trained academic otolaryngologists in the United States. A secondary objective was to further understand the output among the larger fellowship fields. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed for active faculty otolaryngologists. A total of 1704 otolaryngologists were identified as faculty in residency training programs across the United States. Their h-index and publication data were gathered using the Scopus database. The data were obtained in August 2019 and analysis occurred in January 2020. Results Head and neck surgical faculty (25.5%) had the highest representation with fellowship experience. Among all faculty, there was no statistical difference in the overall average h-index scores when comparing faculty that had fellowship training with those who did not (12.6 and 12.1, respectively, P = .498). Rhinologists had the highest publication output per year at 3.90. Among fellowship-trained faculty, the highest average h-index and total publications were seen in head & neck surgery, while facial plastics had the lowest averages ( P < .001). Conclusions In this study, fellowship-trained faculty had a greater but not significant scholarly impact than nonfellowship faculty. Furthermore, there were significant variations in output among the various subspecialties of otolaryngology. Growing fields, as academic rhinology, are continuing to flourish in robust research productivity and output. This study further demonstrates the potential, growing influence of fellowship training on research involvement and academic advancement within the otolaryngology subspecialties.

Background Balloon sinuplasty (BSP) has become a common, minimally invasive treatment for chronic sinusitis. Like any surgical procedure, there are definite risks when using it as a stand-alone procedure or in conjunction with other revision procedures. Objective To explore the adverse events of BSP using the openFDA cloud with regard to malfunction and injury following surgery. Methods Between January 2015 and December 2018, the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) openFDA database was queried for adverse event use. Reports were further categorized by procedure location, injury type, device malfunction, procedure (stand-alone BSP vs hybrid), and source of complication (anatomical or surgeon related). Results Seventy-eight events were reported to the FDA in the study period. Majority of cases consisted of device malfunctions (64.1%), while patient injuries consisted of 43.5%. Frontal sinus procedures had the greatest presence of adverse events (47.4%) with the majority reporting significant cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks ( P < .001) and device retention ( P = .021). Orbital complications ( P = .004) were found to be significantly associated with dilation of the maxillary sinus. Skull-based injuries were the only factor incident in which surgeon-reported anatomical complications were significant ( P = .018). Conclusions As balloon dilation procedure continues to rise in the United States, significant adverse events continue to occur. Frontal sinus BSP leads to the highest number of complications and a 4.75 reported CSF leaks yearly. Based on real data, surgeons performing the procedure should be acquainted with common BSP-related injuries so they can prepare for those circumstances and share informed consent with their patients.