Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is characterized by persistent symptomatic inflammation of the nasal and paranasal mucosa that lasts longer than 12 weeks. This inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses affects 10–15% of US and European populations. CRS patients who are refractory to optimal medical management are candidates for functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). Success rate of FESS may be as high as 90% in Chronic Rhinosinusitis patients without polyps (CRSsNP) and drop to the level of less than 30% in CRS patients with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). Multiple factors contribute to the need for revision endoscopic sinus surgery (RESS) including surgical technique, extent of disease, anatomic obstruction, and postoperative care. When maximal appropriate medical therapy has failed revision surgery must focus on maximizing quality-of-life outcomes. The preoperative analysis begins with a thorough in-office endoscopic examination combined with thin-cut sinus computed tomography scan (axial, coronal, and sagittal views), to allow a triplanar assessment of the postsurgical sinonasal cavities. It is essential to evaluate the most constant standard anatomical landmarks helpful in RESS for the different paranasal sinuses to approach. Postoperative management of RESS is as important as surgery. Postoperative debridments are controversial in the management of scar formation. Irrigations with saline or steroid added irrigations are very helpful for CRS with nasal polyposis. EFRS patients may benefit from systemic steroids for approximately 12 weeks in a tapered fashion. Topical nasal steroids are shown to be effective in randomised clinical trials and continued for a longer time up to 6 months.
Revision sinus surgery Chronic rhinosinusitis Surgical technique Extent of disease Anatomic obstruction Postoperative care
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Fokkens WJ, et al. European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. Rhinol Suppl. 2012;50:1–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastan D, Fokkens WJ, Bachert C, et al. Chronic rhinosinusitis in Europe—an underestimated disease. A GA2LEN study. Allergy. 2011;66:1216–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackwell DL, Lucas JW, Clarke TC. Summary health statistics for US adults. Vital Health Stat. 2014;10(260):1–161.Google Scholar
Vlaminck S, Vauterin T, Hellings PW, et al. The importance of local eosinophilia in the surgical outcome of chronic rhinosinusitis. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2014;28(3):260–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillers M, Lay K. Principles of revision functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Oper Tech Otolaryngol. 2016;17(1):6–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soler ZM, Hyer JM, Rudmik L, et al. Cluster analysis and prediction of treatment outcomes for chronic rhinosinusitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016;137:1054–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stankiewicz JA, Donzelli JJ, Chow JM. Failures of functional endoscopic sinus surgery and their surgical correction. Oper Tech Otolaryngol. 1996;7(3):297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otto KJ, DelGaudio JM. Operative findings in the frontal recess at time of revision surgery. Am J Otolaryngol. 2010;31(3):175–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks PL, Snidvongs K, Rom D, et al. The impact of neo-osteogenesis on disease control in chronic rhinosinusitis after primary surgery. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2013;3(10):823–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richtsmeier WJ. Top 10 reasons for endoscopic maxillary sinus surgery failure. Laryngoscope. 2001;111(11 Pt 1):1952–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudmik L, Smith TL. Evidence-based practice: postoperative care in endoscopic sinus surgery. Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2012;45(5):1019–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar