The burden of revision sinonasal surgery in the UK – Data from the Chronic Rhinosinusitis Epidemiology Study (CRES); a cross sectional study

Carl Philpott, Claire Hopkins, Sally Erskine, Nirmal Kumar, Alasdair Robertson, Amir Farboud, Shahzada Ahmed, Shahram Anari, Russell Cathcart, Hisham Khalil, Paul Jervis, Sean Carrie, Naveed Kara, Peter Prinsley, Robert Almeyda, Nicholas Mansell, Vishnu Sunkaraneni, Mahmoud Salam, Jaydip Ray, Jaan PanesaarJonathan Hobson, Allan Clark, Steve Morris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

102 Citations (Scopus)
8 Downloads (Pure)


Objectives/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to investigate the surgical revision rate in patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS) in the UK CRS Epidemiology Study (CRES). Previous evidence from national Sinonasal Audit showed that 1459 CRS patients demonstrated a surgical revision rate 19.1% at 5 years, with highest rates seen in those with polyps (20.6%).  
Setting: Thirty secondary care centres around the UK.  
Participants: A total of 221 controls and 1249 patients with CRS were recruited to the study including those with polyps (CRSwNPs), without polyps (CRSsNPs) and with allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS).  
Interventions: Self-administered questionnaire.  
Primary outcome measure: The need for previous sinonasal surgery.  
Results: A total of 651 patients with CRSwNPs, 553 with CRSsNPs and 45 with AFRS were included. A total of 396 (57%) of patients with CRSwNPs/AFRS reported having undergone previous endoscopic nasal polypectomy (ENP), of which 182 of the 396 (46%) reported having received more than one operation. The mean number of previous surgeries per patient in the revision group was 3.3 (range 2 to 30) and a mean duration of time of 10 years since the last procedure. The average length of time since their first operation up to inclusion in the study was 15.5 years (range 0-74). Only 27.9% of all patients reporting a prior ENP had received concurrent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) (n=102). For comparison, surgical rates in patients with CRSsNPs were significantly lower; 13% of cases specifically reported ESS and of those only 30% reported multiple procedures (chi-squared p < 0.001).  
Conclusions: This study demonstrated there is a high burden of both primary and revision surgery in patients with CRS, worst in those with AFRS and least in those with CRSsNPs. The burden of revision surgery appears unchanged in the decade since the Sinonasal Audit.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere006680
JournalBMJ Open
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 29 Apr 2015

Cite this