The effect of maxillary sinus antrostomy size on the sinus microbiome. Issue 1 (25th October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kim, Alexander S.; Willis, Amanda L.; Laubitz, Daniel; Sharma, Saurabh; Song, Brian H.; Chiu, Alexander G.; Le, Christopher H.; Chang, Eugene H.
• Is Part Of: International forum of allergy & rhinology. Volume 9:Issue 1(2019:Jan.)
• Page Start: 30
• Page End: 38
• Publication Date: 2018-10-25
• Subjects: maxillary -- sinus -- antrostomy -- microbiome -- cytokines; 617.51005
• DOI: 10.1002/alr.22224
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2042-6976

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The optimal maxillary antrostomy size to surgically treat sinusitis is not well known. In this study, we examined clinical metrics of disease severity and symptom scores, measured secreted inflammatory markers, and characterized the sinus microbiome to determine if there were significant differences in outcome between different maxillary ostial sizes. Methods: Prospective randomized, single‐blinded clinical trial enrolling 12 individuals diagnosed with recurrent acute or chronic rhinosinusitis. Each patient was blinded and randomized to receive minimal maxillary ostial dilation via balloon sinuplasty on 1 side vs a mega‐antrostomy on the contralateral side. Data collected included symptom scores (20‐item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test [SNOT‐20]), endoscopy, and radiologic Lund‐Mackay scores. During surgery and at their postoperative visit swabs were obtained from each maxillary sinus, and 16S DNA and inflammatory cytokine levels analyzed. The use of each patient as their own control allowed us to minimize confounding variables. Results: There was statistically significant improvement in SNOT‐20 symptom scores postoperatively in all patients. There were no significant differences between maxillary ostial size in postoperative endoscopy scores, cytokine profile, or bacterial burden. There were statistically significant differences in relative postoperative abundance of Staphylococcus, Lactococcus, and Cyanobacteria between the mega‐antrostomy and mini‐antrostomy. Conclusions: The method used in surgical maxillary antrostomies had no effect on endoscopy scores or cytokine profiles. Microbiome analysis determined significant differences between the different antrostomy sizes in postoperative Staphylococcus, Lactococcus, and Cyanobacteria abundance. The clinical significance of these changes in the sinus microbiome are not known but may be a result of increased access to postoperative sinonasal irrigations.