Anatomic findings in revision endoscopic sinus surgery: Case series and review of contributory factors

Jessica Bewick, Francesco M. Egro, Liam Masterson, Amin R. Javer, Carl M. Philpott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)
8 Downloads (Pure)


Background: It is recognized that patients who undergo endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) do not always achieve control of their disease. The causes are multifactorial; variations in surgical practice have been identified as possible factors in refractory disease.

Objective: To reflect on the frequent anatomic findings of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) who require revision ESS.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients who required revision ESS at a tertiary institution over a 3-year period. Patients for whom maximal medical therapy failed for CRS underwent computed tomography of the paranasal sinuses and image-guided surgery. Surgical records of anatomic findings were reviewed and analyzed.

Results: Over 3 years, a total of 75 patients underwent revision procedures, 28% of all ESS performed in the unit. The most frequent finding was a residual uncinate process in 64% of the patients (n 48); other findings included a maxillary antrostomy not based on the natural ostium of the maxillary sinus in 47% (n 35), an oversized antrostomy in 29% (n 22), resected middle turbinates in 35% (n 26), middle meatal stenosis in 15% (n 11), synechiae in 29% (n 22), and osteitic bone that required drilling in 13% (n 10).

Conclusion: Surgical technique can give rise to anatomic variations that may prevent adequate mucociliary clearance and medication delivery, which leads to failure in ESS in patients with CRS. This study demonstrated the surgical findings encountered in revision ESS that should be highlighted in the training of Ear, Nose and Throat surgeons to help prevent primary failure and reduce health care costs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e151-e157
Number of pages7
JournalAllergy and Rhinology
Issue number3
Early online date4 Nov 2016
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Cite this