Functional endoscopic sinus surgery in the paediatric population: outcome of a conservative approach to postoperative...

Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) has become a widely used and effective tool in treating chronic sinusitis refractory to medical therapy. Reported success rates, defined mainly on the basis of improvement of preoperative symptoms, have been encouraging and ranged between 71 and 93%. However, in most of these studies, a second-look endoscopy under general anaesthesia was performed 2 to 3 weeks following the initial surgery in order to débride and clean the operative site. In this study, we present the outcome of FESS in our centre, where a second-look endoscopy was never performed. A retrospective study on all of the patients operated on between May 1987 and May 1997 was undertaken. All 35 patients had symptoms of sinusitis and had received initial medical therapy for at least 2 months. Only those who did not improve were considered candidates for surgery. Prior to the operation, all patients had computed tomography scan of the sinuses to document the extent of their disease. Eleven patients (31%) had asthma, 3 patients had cystic fibrosis, 1 had leukemia, 1 had immotile cilia, and 1 had Kartagener's syndrome. The period of follow-up ranged between 3 months and 5 years. Success was determined by resolution or improvement of the preoperative symptoms as assessed during their latest follow-up visit. Our data show an overall success rate of 74%. More than half of the patients (56%) who had recurrence of symptoms had an underlying systemic condition (cystic fibrosis, leukemia, or ciliary dyskinesia); however, these patients showed an initial improvement during the first few months following FESS. Also, five patients (14%) required revision FESS within 1 to 3 years following their initial surgery; four of those patients (80%) had an underlying systemic condition. Based on these results, we conclude that second-look endoscopy is of no benefit following routine FESS since our success rates are comparable to those reported in the literature.