Equivalence in outcomes between Draf 2B vs Draf 3 frontal sinusotomy for refractory chronic frontal rhinosinusitis

Background

Endoscopic Draf 2B and Draf 3 frontal sinusotomies are frequently performed for chronic refractory frontal rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between Draf 2B and Draf 3 procedures.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted comparing patients undergoing bilateral Draf 2B vs Draf 3 procedures from 2000 to 2016. Patients with neoplasia, dysplasia, mucocele, cystic fibrosis, or ciliary dyskinesia were excluded. Preoperative disease parameters included number of prior surgeries, presence of polyps, preoperative 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) score, frontal Lund-Mackay score, anterior-posterior diameter of the frontal ostium, and Global Osteitis Scoring Scale (GOSS). Postoperative outcomes included SNOT-22 score, neo-ostium patency, surgical revision rates, and complications.

Results

A total of 21 patients with bilateral Draf 2B and 17 patients with Draf 3 surgeries were compared. Mean follow-up time was 15.6 months. No significant differences were seen between groups for any preoperative disease parameter. Both cohorts showed statistically significant (p = 0.0001 [Draf 2B]; p = 0.0001 [Draf 3]) and clinically meaningful (Δ = 24.1; Δ = 24.9) improvements in SNOT-22 at last follow-up vs preoperatively. The Draf 2B group had greater improvement in SNOT-22 score than the Draf 3 group at 1 to 3 months (p = 0.003), but the magnitude of improvement equalized at 5 to 9 months (p = 0.66) and last follow-up (p = 0.90). No significant differences were noted between groups regarding patency, revision rates, or complications.

Conclusion

Both Draf 2B and Draf 3 procedures offer durable symptomatic improvement for patients with refractory frontal CRS. The Draf 2B is associated with earlier postoperative symptom improvement and overall shows comparable long-term outcomes to the Draf 3 sinusotomy.

http://ift.tt/2ho4gsg