Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes of endoscopic ethmoidectomy performed on a day-case basis: a prospective bi-centric study

  • Rhinology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Evaluation of endoscopic ethmoidectomy performed as a day-case in terms of security, quality, and satisfaction of the patient. This prospective observatory bi-centric study over 1 year included 74 patients undergoing an ethmoidectomy respecting the eligibility criteria of ambulatory care. We recorded patients’ demographic data, operative details, satisfaction, postoperative course, and follow-up results. Nasal symptoms were evaluated by SNOT-22 on preoperative appointment and postoperatively at D30. No non-absorbable nasal packing was used, eventually in the case of preoperative-bleeding absorbable gelatine packing. The postoperative follow-up took place at D1 by phone call and at D10 and D30 to assess complications, Visual Analogue Scale, and state of ethmoidal corridors by endoscopic exam. Patients benefited of bilateral ethmoidectomy in 82.4 % cases associated with septoplasty in 42 %. The majority (95 %) was discharged on the same day. Only one patient had bleeding at D0 and was kept in standard hospitalization, such as three other patients for medical or organizational reasons not related to surgery. At D1, 23 % described postoperative light bleeding but needed no revisit and pain was estimated at 1.3 (VAS). No readmission was observed, and no major complication was noted. SNOT-22 decreased successfully by 56 %, statistically related to postoperative treatment of corticosteroids and in the case of Samter triad. 97 % of patients were satisfied of the ambulatory care. These results suggest that within an experienced and dedicated day-case medical and paramedical team, ethmoidectomy can be safely performed on a day-case basis with high quality of taking care and satisfaction of patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Haute Autorité de Santé. Ensemble pour le développement de la chirurgie ambulatoire. Socle de connaissances. Saint-Denis La Plaine, Paris: HAS, ANAP; 2012. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-04/rapport-socledeconnaissances.pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2016

  2. Haute Autorité de Santé. Ensemble pour le développement de la chirurgie ambulatoire. Tarification de la chirurgie ambulatoire en France et à l’étranger. Etat des lieux et perspectives. HAS, ANAP; 2013. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/upload/docs/application/pdf/2013-09/rapport_dorientation_-_tarification_de_la_chirurgie_ambulatoire_en_france_et_a_letranger.pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2016

  3. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland, British Association of Day Surgery (2011) Day case and short stay surgery: 2. Anaesthesia 66(5):417–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Guidelines for Ambulatory Anesthesia and Surgery, Committee of Origin: Ambulatory Surgical Care—approved by the ASA House of Delegates on October 15, 2003, and last amended on October 22, and reaffirmed on October 16, 2013. http://www.asahq.org. Accessed 2 Apr 2016

  5. de Gabory L et al (2015) French Otorhinolaryngology Society guidelines for day-case nasal surgery. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 132(1):35–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hopkins C et al (2007) Variation in day-case nasal surgery—why cannot we improve our day-case rates? Clin Otolaryngol 32(1):12–18

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Al-Hussaini A et al (2015) Day-case septoplasty: a default pathway or is case selection the key? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 272(1):91–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhattacharyya N (2010) Ambulatory sinus and nasal surgery in the United States: demographics and perioperative outcomes. Laryngoscope 120(3):635–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Suzuki S et al (2015) Complication rates after functional endoscopic sinus surgery: analysis of 50,734 Japanese patients. Laryngoscope 125(8):1785–1791

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rudmik L et al (2015) Using preoperative SNOT-22 score to inform patient decision for Endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope 125(7):1517–1522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. de Dorlodot C et al (2014) French adaptation and validation of the sino-nasal outcome test-22: a prospective cohort study on quality of life among 422 subjects. Clin Otolaryngol 40(1):29–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hildenbrand T (2013) A new gelatine-based hemostat for sinonasal surgery: a clinical survey. Vivo 27(4):523–526

    Google Scholar 

  13. Georgalas C et al (2006) Day-case septoplasty and unexpected re-admissions at a dedicated day-case unit: a 4-year audit. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 88(2):202–206

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Re M et al (2012) Traditional endonasal and microscopic sinus surgery complications versus endoscopic sinus surgery complications: a meta-analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269(3):721–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bajaj Y et al (2009) Endoscopic sinus surgery as day-case procedure. J Laryngol Otol 123(6):619–622

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hogg RP, Prior MJ, Johnson AP (1999) Admission rates, early readmission rates and patient acceptability of 142 cases of day case septoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 24(3):213–215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bhattacharyya N (2014) Unplanned revisits and readmissions after ambulatory sinonasal surgery. Laryngoscope 124(9):1983–1987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wong A, Kacker A (2014) Incidence of unplanned admissions after sinonasal surgery: a 6-year review. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 4(2):143–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Poetker DM et al (2013) Oral corticosteroids in the management of adult chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps: an evidence-based review with recommendations. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 3(2):104–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Eisenberg G et al (2008) Nasosinusal endoscopic surgery as major out-patient surgery. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 59(2):57–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Abdalla S, Alreefy H, Hopkins C (2012) Prevalence of sinonasal outcome test (SNOT-22) symptoms in patients undergoing surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis in the England and Wales National prospective audit. Clin Otolaryngol 37(4):276–282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wright ED, Agrawal S (2007) Impact of perioperative systemic steroids on surgical outcomes in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis: evaluation with the novel Perioperative Sinus Endoscopy (POSE) scoring system. Laryngoscope 117(11 Pt 2 Suppl 115):1–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ye J et al (2009) Technique and results of the anterior-to-posterior-to-anterior approach in revision endoscopic sinus surgery. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 71(5):257–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lemos P et al (2009) Patient satisfaction following day surgery. J Clin Anesth 21(3):200–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Garcia Duran A et al (2003) Levels of satisfaction and perceived quality in a day surgery unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 95(12):851–862

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service d’ORL et Chirurgie de la Face et du Cou, Hôpital Lariboisière, Aphp, 2, rue Ambroise Paré, Paris Cedex 10, France

    N. Oker, P. Herman, N. Leclerc, P. Vironneau, H. Dang, J. Majer, J.-P. Blancal, R. Kania & B. Verillaud

  2. Université Paris Diderot, U.F.R. de Médecine Paris Diderot-Paris 7, 10 avenue de Verdun, 75010, Paris, France

    N. Oker, P. Herman, N. Leclerc, P. Vironneau, H. Dang, J. Majer, J.-P. Blancal, R. Kania & B. Verillaud

  3. Service d’ORL et Chirurgie Cervico-Faciale, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Gabriel Montpied, 58 Rue Montalembert, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    V. Dupuch, R. Pastourel, Y. Pavier, N. Saroul, T. Mom & L. Gilain

  4. Faculté de Médecine Clermont-Ferrand, Université d’Auvergne, 28 place Henri Dunant, 63001, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    V. Dupuch, R. Pastourel, Y. Pavier, N. Saroul, T. Mom & L. Gilain

  5. Unité de Recherche Clinique (URC) Saint-Louis Lariboisière Fernand-Widal, 200 rue du Faubourg St Denis, Paris Cedex 10, France

    E. Vicaut

Authors
  1. N. Oker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V. Dupuch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Leclerc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. Vironneau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. Dang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. J. Majer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. R. Pastourel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Y. Pavier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. J.-P. Blancal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. N. Saroul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. T. Mom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. R. Kania
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. E. Vicaut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. L. Gilain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. B. Verillaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Oker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study is in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments and with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee: a declaration was submitted to the CNIL (Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés, France) for each center and accepted the 7th of February 2015 under the numbers 1836375 and 1834502, respectively. The protocol was validated by the Ethic Committee with the number 2015/CE19.

Additional information

N. Oker and V. Dupuch are first co-authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oker, N., Dupuch, V., Herman, P. et al. Outcomes of endoscopic ethmoidectomy performed on a day-case basis: a prospective bi-centric study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 274, 305–310 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-4263-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-4263-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation