Assessment of quality of life after endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis

8Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Chronic rhinosinusitis is a disease of undefined etiology that significantly impacts the quality of life of its patients. Various studies carried out in countries other than Brazil have shown endoscopic sinus surgery as an effective means of treating this condition. Objective: This study aims to analyze, with the aid of SNOT-20, the association between endoscopic sinus surgery and disease-specific quality of life of Brazilian patients treated for chronic rhinosinusitis accompanied or not by nasal polyps. Materials and Methods: This prospective study enrolled patients submitted to endoscopic sinus surgery after drug therapy failed to improve their symptoms. They were assessed based on questionnaire SNOT-20p before and 12 months after surgery. Improvement on total scores and on the five items deemed more important by each patient were assessed. The study also looked into the correlation between preoperative scores and postoperative improvement and if there were any gender-related improvement differences. Results: Forty-three patients aged 44 (19), md (IQR), 65% of whom (26/43) were males. Statistically significant improvement was seen on SNOT-20 and SNOT-20(5+) and a correlation was established between preoperative scores and postoperative improved scores (p<0.001). No gender-related differences were observed in quality of life. Conclusion: Endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis is associated with statistically significant improvements in disease-specific quality of life.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bezerra, T. F. P., Piccirillo, J. F., Fornazieri, M. A., Pilan, R. R. de M., Pinna, F. de R., Padua, F. G. de M., & Voegels, R. L. (2012). Assessment of quality of life after endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 78(2), 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000200015

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free