Systematic review of patient-reported outcomes after revision endoscopic sinus surgery

Background: Revision endoscopic sinus surgery (RESS) may be required for partially controlled or uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis. Studies that reported technical success, e.g., sinus ostia patency after RESS, do not address whether the patient's symptoms and quality of life (QOL) improve after surgery. However, patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are useful to assess the impact of sinus surgery on a patient's symptoms and QOL. Objective: This systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the impact of RESS on PROMs. Methods: Medical literature databases were searched for studies in English. References from retrieved articles and relevant reviews were examined for additional studies. Those studies that reported QOL outcome tools in patients who underwent RESS and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included. Results: A search of the sources yielded 1856 citations. There were 72 articles after abstract review and exclusion, identified for full-text review, with 12 studies (which contained data from 1308 patients) that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. There were four "good" and eight "fair" studies. Three studies used the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index and Chronic Sinusitis Survey in tandem; two each used the 20-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test and the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test; the remaining studies used either the Adelaide Disease Severity Score, Patient Response Score (PRS), Rhinosinusitis Symptom Inventory, Rhinosinusitis Outcome Measure 31, or the Chinese version of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test. All studies used validated PROMs apart from the study that used PRS. Studies consistently reported improvement in the five key symptoms of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, facial pain, and anosmia, although improvement in halitosis, fever, dental pain, and cough were modest. Conclusion: Several PROMs demonstrated that RESS improves patient's QOL symptoms. Future studies that examine QOL should use a consistent PROM to allow a meta-analysis.