Background: Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is distinct from non-odontogenic rhinosinusitis, and often requires multidisciplinary collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental providers to make the diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to develop international multidisciplinary consensus on diagnosing ODS. Methods: A modified Delphi method was used to assess for expert consensus on diagnosing bacterial ODS. A multidisciplinary panel of 17 authors with ODS expertise from 8 countries (8 otolaryngologists, 9 dental specialists) was assembled. Each author completed 2 of 3 surveys (2 specialty-specific, and 1 for all
The objective of this study was to perform translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the SNOT-22 in the Lithuanian language. This is a prospective case-control study. The study was conducted at the University clinic. The sino-nasal outcome test 22 (SNOT-22) was translated into the Lithuanian language; the pilot study involved 34 patients, the test-retest group consisted of 34 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), and the control group of 115 patients with no CRS complaints; 36 patients were evaluated before surgery and 3 months after surgery. The results showed a good internal correlation with Cronbach's alpha-0.89 in the initial test, and 0.93 in the retest; both values suggesting good internal consistency within the SNOT-22. Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.72 (p < 0.001), revealing good correlation between the initial scores and the retests scores. Our sample of healthy individuals had a median score of 12 points, and the instrument was capable of differentiating between the healthy and the patient group, demonstrating its validity (p < 0.0001). The statistically significant reduction in the post-operative scores, vis-à-vis pre-operative values, demonstrates the responsiveness of the instrument. The minimally important difference was 13 points in the SNOT-22 score. The Lithuanian version of the SNOT-22 is a valid instrument for assessing patients with CRS. It demonstrated good internal consistency, reproducibility, validity, and responsiveness.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency and the causes of the intra- and postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks and to discuss the sella closure methods. Methods. During the period from 1995 to 2005, 313 patients underwent 356 transsphenoidal operations for pituitary adenoma. Microadenoma was found in 80 (22.5%) cases, and in 276 (77.5%) cases, macroadenoma was removed. Two different methods to close the sella were used. The first one consisted packing the sella turcica and sphenoidal sinus with autologous fat and restoring the defect of sella turcica with autologous bone. In more resent practice, the regenerated oxidized cellulose (Surgicel®) and collagen sponge with human fibrin (TachoSil®) were used to cover the sella membrane defect, followed by packing the sella with autologous fat and covering the dural defect with Surgicel® and TachoSil®. Results. Adenoma was totally removed in 198 (55.6%) cases out of 356. Microadenoma was totally removed in 91.3% and macroadenoma in 45.3% of cases, respectively. Postoperative complications were noted in 40 (11.2%) patients. Two (0.6%) patients died after surgery. Intraoperative CSF leakage was observed in 58 (16.3%) cases. Postoperative CSF leakages were observed in 3 cases, when the method of packing the sella with just autologous fat was used, whereas in 29 cases when the sella fat packing was used together with Surgicel® and TachoSil® to cover the sella membrane and dural defects, no postoperative CSF leakages were observed. Conclusions. The technique of covering the sella membrane and dural defects with Surgicel® and TachoSil® in the presence of intraoperative CSF leakage appeared to be the most reliable one, as no postoperative CSF leakage applying this technique has been observed.
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.