Otolaryngologist surgical preferences for orbital decompression in thyroid eye disease: A North American survey

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Ryan C. Higgins MD, Ciaran F. Lane MSC, MD, FRCSC, Neerav Goyal MD, MPH, FACS
{"title":"Otolaryngologist surgical preferences for orbital decompression in thyroid eye disease: A North American survey","authors":"Ryan C. Higgins MD,&nbsp;Ciaran F. Lane MSC, MD, FRCSC,&nbsp;Neerav Goyal MD, MPH, FACS","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Orbital decompression is recommended for TED especially in the treatment of severe, refractory cases yet there are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. Previously conducted surveys assessed variations in the management of TED but only amongst ophthalmologists. Our study attempts to better characterize surgical and perioperative preferences amongst otolaryngologists in the management of TED.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A survey was administered to the American Rhinologic Society and Canadian Society of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery via REDCap with 52 total respondents. Respondent demographic information and pre-operative management, procedural specifics, and post-operative management preferences were collected.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The majority of respondents practiced in a metropolitan (82.7%), academic setting (73.1%) and received subspecialty training in Rhinology &amp; Skull Base Surgery (88.9%). Most elected for corticosteroids (63.5%) and medical management (69.2%) prior to orbital decompression but did not use any classification system (86.5%). Orbital decompression was most often done with ophthalmology collaboration (71.2%). Removal of two bony walls (55.8%) via medial wall (97.9%) and orbital floor (72.3%) removal was most preferred. Removal of one orbital fat aspect (60.6%) via the medial fat pad was most preferred. Combined bone and fat removal (59.6%) completed via an endoscopic approach (71.2% and 97.0%, respectively) was most common. Post-operatively, most patients were not admitted (88.4%) with saline nasal rinses (92.3%) utilized by most respondents.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This survey completed by otolaryngologists highlights several key distinctions in the preferred surgical approach during orbital decompression and the perioperative management of TED when compared to ophthalmologists and current recommendations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of evidence</h3>\n \n <p>Level 4.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"9 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626485/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Orbital decompression is recommended for TED especially in the treatment of severe, refractory cases yet there are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal surgical approach. Previously conducted surveys assessed variations in the management of TED but only amongst ophthalmologists. Our study attempts to better characterize surgical and perioperative preferences amongst otolaryngologists in the management of TED.

Methods

A survey was administered to the American Rhinologic Society and Canadian Society of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery via REDCap with 52 total respondents. Respondent demographic information and pre-operative management, procedural specifics, and post-operative management preferences were collected.

Results

The majority of respondents practiced in a metropolitan (82.7%), academic setting (73.1%) and received subspecialty training in Rhinology & Skull Base Surgery (88.9%). Most elected for corticosteroids (63.5%) and medical management (69.2%) prior to orbital decompression but did not use any classification system (86.5%). Orbital decompression was most often done with ophthalmology collaboration (71.2%). Removal of two bony walls (55.8%) via medial wall (97.9%) and orbital floor (72.3%) removal was most preferred. Removal of one orbital fat aspect (60.6%) via the medial fat pad was most preferred. Combined bone and fat removal (59.6%) completed via an endoscopic approach (71.2% and 97.0%, respectively) was most common. Post-operatively, most patients were not admitted (88.4%) with saline nasal rinses (92.3%) utilized by most respondents.

Conclusions

This survey completed by otolaryngologists highlights several key distinctions in the preferred surgical approach during orbital decompression and the perioperative management of TED when compared to ophthalmologists and current recommendations.

Level of evidence

Level 4.

Abstract Image

耳鼻喉科医生对甲状腺眼病眼眶减压手术的偏好:一项北美调查。
背景:眶内减压被推荐用于TED,特别是在治疗严重、难治性病例时,但关于最佳手术入路尚无明确的指导方针。先前进行的调查评估了TED管理的差异,但仅限于眼科医生。我们的研究试图更好地描述耳鼻喉科医生在治疗TED时的手术和围手术期偏好。方法:通过REDCap对美国鼻科学学会和加拿大耳鼻喉头颈外科学会进行调查,共52人。收集调查对象的人口统计信息、术前管理、手术细节和术后管理偏好。结果:大多数受访者在大都市实习(82.7%),学术机构(73.1%)和接受鼻颅底外科亚专科培训(88.9%)。大多数选择在眶减压前使用皮质类固醇(63.5%)和医疗管理(69.2%),但未使用任何分类系统(86.5%)。眶内减压最常在眼科合作下完成(71.2%)。通过内侧壁(97.9%)和眶底(72.3%)去除两种骨壁(55.8%)是最受欢迎的。通过内侧脂肪垫去除眼眶一侧脂肪(60.6%)是最可取的。经内窥镜入路完成骨和脂肪联合去除(59.6%)(分别为71.2%和97.0%)最为常见。术后,大多数患者未入院(88.4%),大多数应答者使用生理盐水冲洗鼻腔(92.3%)。结论:这项由耳鼻喉科医生完成的调查,与眼科医生和目前的建议相比,突出了眼眶减压和TED围手术期管理的首选手术入路的几个关键区别。证据等级:四级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信