Introduction The frontal sinus (FS) is the most complex of the paranasal sinuses due to its location, anatomical variations and multiple clinical presentations. The surgical management of the FS and of the frontal recess (FR) is technically challenging, and a complete understanding of its anatomy, radiology, main diseases and surgical techniques is crucial to achieve therapeutic success.
Objectives To review the FS and FR anatomy, radiology, and surgical techniques.
Data Synthesis The FS features a variety of anatomical, volumetric and dimensional characteristics. From the endoscopic point of view, the FR is the point of greatest narrowing and, to have access to this region, one must know the anatomical limits and the ethmoid cells that are located around the FR and very often block the sinus drainage. Benign diseases such as chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), mucocele and osteomas are the main pathologies found in the FS; however, there is a wide variety of malignant tumors that can also affect this region and represent a major technical challenge to the surgeon. With the advances in the endoscopic technique, the vast majority of diseases that affect the FS can be treated according to Wolfgang Draf, who systemized the approaches into four types (I, IIa, IIb, III).
Conclusion Both benign and malignant diseases that affect the FS and FR can be successfully managed if one has a thorough understanding of the FS and FR anatomy, an individualized approach of the best surgical technique in each case, and the appropriate tools to operate in this region.
In our ENT practice, foreign bodies were more commonly seen in children; the ears were the preferential site of occurrence. Complication rates and use of general anesthesia were low in our practice. It should be stressed that ENT foreign bodies need to be properly managed so as to avoid complications.
The Stamm's S-point, a novel source of spontaneous severe epistaxis, is reported, and its cauterization was effective and safe. Otolaryngologists must actively seek this site of bleeding in cases of severe epistaxis.
Objectives This study aimed to establish the anatomical landmarks for performing a contralateral transmaxillary approach (CTM) to the petrous apex (PA) and petroclival region (PCR), and to compare CTM with a purely endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA).
Design EEA and CTM to the PA and PCR were performed bilaterally in eight human anatomical specimens. Surgical techniques and anatomical landmarks were described, and EEA was compared with CTM with respect to ability to reach the contralateral internal acoustic canal (IAC). Computed tomographic scans of 25 cadaveric heads were analyzed and the “angle” and “reach” of CTM and EEA were measured.
Results Entry to the PA via a medial approach was limited by (1) abducens nerve superiorly, (2) internal carotid artery (ICA) laterally, and (3) petroclival synchondrosis inferiorly (Gardner's triangle). With CTM, it was possible to reach the contralateral IAC bilaterally in all specimens dissected, without dissection of the ipsilateral ICAs, pterygopalatine fossae, and Eustachian tubes. Without CTM, reaching the contralateral IAC was possible only if: (1) angled endoscopes and instruments were employed or (2) the pterygopalatine fossa was dissected with mobilization of the ICA and resection of the Eustachian tube. The average “angle” and “reach” advantages for CTM were 25.6-degree greater angle of approach behind the petrous ICA and 1.4-cm more lateral reach.
Conclusion The techniques and anatomical landmarks for CTM to the PA and PCR are described. Compared with a purely EEA, the CTM provides significant “angle” and “reach” advantages for the PA and PCR.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.