Otolaryngology - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 11
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Comparison of Quality of Life between Patients Undergoing Submental Endoscopic Thyroidectomy and Conventional Thyroidectomy: A Prospective Controlled Clinical Trial
    Piromchai, P (MDPI, 2022-08)
    The objectives of this study were to compare the surgical outcomes and quality of life between patients undergoing submental endoscopic thyroidectomy and those undergoing conventional thyroidectomy. The surgical outcomes and quality of life were recorded. Forty-eight patients were included in the study. Their ages ranged from 20 to 60 years. All patients underwent lobectomy, isthmectomy, or the combination of lobectomy and isthmectomy. Most histological diagnoses were benign (85.42%). The submental endoscopic thyroidectomy group showed better scores in the energy/fatigue, emotional wellbeing, and general health domains (p = 0.006, 0.041, and 0.004, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes between the submental endoscopic thyroidectomy and conventional thyroidectomy groups (p > 0.05). Submental endoscopic thyroidectomy is feasible, and permits a better quality of life in terms of the energy/fatigue, emotional wellbeing, and general health domains.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis
    Chong, L-Y ; Piromchai, P ; Sharp, S ; Snidvongs, K ; Webster, KE ; Philpott, C ; Hopkins, C ; Burton, MJ (WILEY, 2021)
    BACKGROUND: This living systematic review is one of several Cochrane Reviews evaluating the medical management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic rhinosinusitis is common. It is characterised by inflammation of the nasal and sinus linings, nasal blockage, rhinorrhoea, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. It occurs with or without nasal polyps.   'Biologics' are medicinal products produced by a biological process. Monoclonal antibodies are one type, already evaluated in other inflammatory conditions (e.g. asthma and atopic dermatitis). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL (2020, Issue 9); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 28 September 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least three months follow-up comparing biologics (monoclonal antibodies) against placebo/no treatment in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), disease severity and serious adverse events (SAEs). The secondary outcomes were avoidance of surgery, extent of disease (measured by endoscopic or computerised tomography (CT) score), generic HRQL and adverse effects (nasopharyngitis, including sore throat). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 studies. Of 1262 adult participants, 1260 had severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps; 43% to 100% of participants also had asthma. Three biologics, with different targets, were evaluated: dupilumab, mepolizumab and omalizumab. All of the studies were sponsored or supported by industry. For this update (2021) we have included two new studies, including 265 participants, which reported data relating to omalizumab. Anti-IL-4Rα mAb (dupilumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Three studies (784 participants) evaluated dupilumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22 (a 22-item questionnaire, with a score range of 0 to 110; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) 8.9 points). At 24 weeks, dupilumab results in a large reduction (improvement) in the SNOT-22 score (mean difference (MD) -19.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) -22.54 to -16.69; 3 studies; 784 participants; high certainty). At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab probably results in a large reduction in disease severity, as measured by a 0- to 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) (MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.47 to -2.53; 3 studies; 784 participants; moderate certainty). This is a global symptom score, including all aspects of chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab may result in a reduction in serious adverse events compared to placebo (5.9% versus 12.5%, risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.76; 3 studies, 782 participants; low certainty). Anti-IL-5 mAb (mepolizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Two studies (137 participants) evaluated mepolizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 25 weeks, the SNOT-22 score may be reduced (improved) in participants receiving mepolizumab (MD -13.26 points, 95% CI -22.08 to -4.44; 1 study; 105 participants; low certainty; MCID 8.9).  It is very uncertain whether there is a difference in disease severity at 25 weeks: on a 0- to 10-point VAS, disease severity was -2.03 lower in those receiving mepolizumab (95% CI -3.65 to -0.41; 1 study; 72 participants; very low certainty). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events at between 25 and 40 weeks (1.4% versus 0%; RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 35.46; 2 studies; 135 participants, very low certainty). Anti-IgE mAb (omalizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Five studies (329 participants) evaluated omalizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 24 weeks omalizumab probably results in a large reduction in SNOT-22 score (MD -15.62, 95% CI -19.79 to -11.45; 2 studies; 265 participants; moderate certainty; MCID 8.9). We did not identify any evidence for overall disease severity. It is very uncertain whether omalizumab affects the number of serious adverse events, with follow-up between 20 and 26 weeks (0.8% versus 2.5%, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.00; 5 studies; 329 participants; very low certainty). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Almost all of the participants in the included studies had nasal polyps (99.8%) and all were using topical nasal steroids for their chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. In these patients, dupilumab improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It probably also results in a reduction in disease severity, and may result in a reduction in the number of serious adverse events. Mepolizumab may improve disease-specific HRQL. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in disease severity or the number of serious adverse events. Omalizumab probably improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events. There was no evidence regarding the effect of omalizumab on disease severity (using global scores that address all symptoms of chronic rhinosinusitis).
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Syringe with Nasal Applicator versus Syringe Alone for Nasal Irrigation in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Matched-Pair Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Piromchai, P ; Phannikul, C ; Thanaviratananich, S (S. Karger AG, 2021)
    BACKGROUND/AIMS: Nasal saline irrigation is a common procedure to relieve nasal symptoms in upper respiratory tract diseases. There is no consensus on the recommended nasal saline delivery devices. The objectives of this study were to evaluate efficacy, satisfaction, adherence, and adverse effects in patients with acute upper respiratory tract diseases using a syringe with a nasal applicator for nasal irrigation. METHODS: Patients with acute nasopharyngitis, acute rhinitis, or acute rhinosinusitis were randomly allocated to use either (1) a syringe with a nasal applicator or (2) a syringe alone to irrigate one nostril. After the patients had completed irrigation with the allocated device in one nostril, they were instructed to perform nasal irrigation using the other device in the other nostril. All patients were instructed to use a syringe with a nasal applicator at home. The efficacy, satisfaction scores, adherence, and adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were enrolled. The mean age of the patients was 33.95 years (18-59 years). The mean duration of symptoms was 4.80 days. None of the enrolled patients regularly performed nasal irrigation. Forty-two had acute nasopharyngitis, 10 had acute rhinitis, and 12 had acute rhinosinusitis. At baseline, the mean overall efficacy score for the syringe with a nasal applicator was 8.17 ± 1.43, and that for the syringe alone was 5.95 ± 2.02 (MD 2.23, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.75-2.70). At 1 week, the syringe with the nasal applicator had significantly higher scores in 3 of 4 domains, including symptom relief, ease of use, and patients' willingness to recommend the device to others, compared to baseline (p < 0.05). None of the enrolled patients had epistaxis, retained/dislodged the applicator during irrigation, or experienced an allergic reaction to the applicator after 1 week of nasal irrigation. CONCLUSION: Use of a syringe with an applicator for nasal irrigation yielded high scores in overall efficacy.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Multicentre cohort study of cochlear implantation outcomes in Thailand
    Piromchai, P ; Tanamai, N ; Kiatthanabumrung, S ; Kaewsiri, S ; Thongyai, K ; Atchariyasathian, V ; Thanawirattananit, P ; Wacharasindhu, C ; Mukkun, T ; Isipradit, P ; Yimtae, K (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2021-11)
    OBJECTIVES: To report the status and outcomes of cochlear implantation in Thailand. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care and university hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent cochlear implant surgery in Thailand. INTERVENTIONS: This project collected data from all government and university hospitals in Thailand where cochlear implant surgery was performed between 2016 and 2020. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline characteristics, operation data, complications, audiological outcomes and quality of life were reported. RESULTS: This study included 458 patients, and nearly half of the patients were children and adolescents (46.94%). The mean age of the patients was 2.96±5.83 years. At 1 year postoperatively, the mean pure tone average of the hearing threshold in the implanted ear significantly improved from unaided preoperative baseline (mean difference (MD) 64.23 dB HL; 95% CI 59.81 to 68.65; p<0.001). The mean speech recognition threshold also improved (MD 55.96 dB HL; 95% CI 49.50 to 62.42, p<0.001). The quality-of-life scores of the EQ-5D-5L, PedsQL and HUI3 questionnaires at 1 year showed improved mobility (range, 0-5; MD 0.65; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.25; p=0.037), hearing (range, 0-6; MD 0.96; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.61; p=0.006) and speech (range, 0-5; MD 0.44; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.84; p=0.031). Common complications included electrode dislodgement (2.18%), vertigo (1.23%) and meningitis (1.93%). CONCLUSIONS: Excellent audiological outcomes and improvement in the quality of life in the mobility, hearing and speech domains were observed in patients who underwent cochlear implantation in Thailand.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Comparison of nasal patency after nose-blowing between pinch versus no pinch method: a randomized controlled trial
    Piromchai, P ; Netnoi, J ; Srirompotong, S ; Thanawirattananit, P (NATURE PORTFOLIO, 2021-11-11)
    We proposed that nose-blowing without pinching was safer and able to get rid of mucus and maintain nasal patency as effective as the pinch and blow method. The objective of this study was to evaluate the nasal patency after nose-blowing by pinching the nose versus no pinching. The patients who have nasal discharge such as allergic rhinitis or common cold were recruited. The patients were randomized to perform pinching or no pinching nose-blowing. Fifty patients were enrolled in this study. The objective evaluation using acoustic rhinometry found no difference in nasal patency between the two groups (p > 0.05). The subjective patency score was significantly higher in the pinch one nostril shut group (mean difference 0.88, 95% CI 0.20-1.55). The patency of the two methods were comparable according to the objective test. However, the patients felt that their nose was clearer when pinching and blowing.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Validity and Reliability of the Thai Version of the Thyroid-Related Patient-Reported Outcome-A Thyroid-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire
    Piromchai, P ; Chaiudomsom, S ; Wijakkanalan, P ; Watt, T (GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG, 2021-01)
    Introduction  The Thyroid-Related Patient-Reported Outcome (ThyPRO) is a new thyroid-specific quality of life patient-reported outcome measure for benign thyroid disorders. Objective  The objective of this study was to investigate the face validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the Thai version of the ThyPRO (ThyPROth). Methods  The translation of the ThyPRO questionnaire was performed using double forward translation, reconciliation, single backward translation, and cognitive debriefing, followed by a panel review. Five thyroid patients evaluated the face validity. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated in 30 patients with thyroid diseases. Results  The overall validity score was 3.75 (range 0-4). The Cronbach α coefficient ranged from 0.76 to 0.95, with a total coefficient of 0.97 (95% CI 0.962-0.959), indicating excellent internal consistency. The test-retest reliability coefficient ranged from 0.70 to 0.97. All values were 0.70 and above. The total reliability coefficient was 0.86 (95% CI 0.724-0.932), indicating excellent reliability. Conclusion  The ThyPROth was found to be valid and to exhibit good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The questionnaire is ready for implementation in the assessment of health-related quality of life in Thai patients with benign thyroid diseases.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The effective screening tools for detecting hearing loss in elderly population: HHIE-ST Versus TSQ
    Chayaopas, N ; Kasemsiri, P ; Thanawirattananit, P ; Piromchai, P ; Yimtae, K (BMC, 2021-01-09)
    BACKGROUND: Globally increasing number of elders is concerned. Hearing loss process in older adults cannot be avoided. An effective screening tool for hearing loss is essential for proper diagnosis and rehabilitation, which can improve QOL in older adults. METHODS: This prospective-diagnostic test study evaluates the diagnostic value of Thai version of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Elderly Screening (HHIE-ST) and the Thai Single Question (TSQ) surveys in screening hearing disability in 1109 Thai participants aged 60 years and older in communities in four provinces in Thailand. The HHIE-ST consisted of 10 selected questions from the validated HHIE-Thai version. A TSQ survey was developed to have the same meaning as an English Single Question survey. The participants answered both questionnaires, and a standard audiometry test assessed with air conduction from 250 to 8000 Hz was included as a gold standard. RESULTS: The prevalence of hearing disability was 38.34%. The HHIE-ST achieved a sensitivity of 88.96% (95% CI 85.77-91.64) and specificity of 52.19% (95% CI 48.24-56.13) for diagnosis hearing disability in Thai older adults, whereas the TSQ yielded a sensitivity of 88.73% and a specificity of 55.93%. A combined test including the HHIE-ST and TSQ achieved better performance with sensitivity of 85.29% and specificity of 60.13%. CONCLUSIONS: Either the HHIE-ST or the TSQ is a sensitive and useful tool for screening hearing disability in Thai older adults. Using the HHIE-ST together with the TSQ resulted in a better screening tool for detecting moderate hearing loss older adults who will benefit and recommended for hearing rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with the following number in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20151015003 . Date of registration October 14, 2015.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Comparison of quality of life between patients undergoing trans-oral endoscopic thyroid surgery and conventional open surgery
    Kasemsiri, P ; Trakulkajornsak, S ; Bamroong, P ; Mahawerawat, K ; Piromchai, P ; Ratanaanekchai, T (BMC, 2020-01-29)
    BACKGROUND: Trans-oral endoscopic thyroidectomy allows obviating scar of the neck that expects to gain quality of life (QOL). However, the benefit of the QOL from this technique has not been adequately investigated, therefore, this study compared the QOL outcomes, including cosmetic outcomes, between thyroidectomy by trans-oral endoscopy and conventional open surgery. METHODS: A study was conducted from January 30, 2017 to November 10, 2018. Thirty-two and 38 patients underwent trans-oral endoscopic thyroid surgery and conventional open surgery, respectively. Their quality of life was evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively using a thyroid surgery-specific questionnaire and a 36-item short-form questionnaire. RESULTS: Trans-oral endoscopic group, patients were younger and presented with smaller thyroid nodules (p < 0.05). Regarding surgical outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer in the trans-oral endoscopic group (p < 0.05). The quality of life parameters in the trans-oral endoscopic group was significantly better than in the conventional surgery group (p < 0.05). These parameters included reduction of physical activity, psychosocial impairment, the role of physic, and emotion at 2 weeks after surgery; swallowing impairment, psychosocial impairment, the role of physic, social function and mental health 6 weeks after surgery; tingling and feeling of vitality at 12 weeks after surgery. Cosmetic outcomes and overall satisfaction were significantly better in the trans-oral endoscopic group than in the conventional surgery group at all of our follow up times (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The trans-oral endoscopic approach allows real scarless on the skin with better cosmetic and QOL outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was retrospectively registered at the ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT03048539), registered on 4 March 2017.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The minimum effective dose of abobotulinum toxin A injection for allergic rhinitis: A dose-escalation randomized controlled trial
    Piromchai, P ; Pornumnouy, W ; Saeseow, P ; Chainansamit, S (WILEY, 2021-02)
    OBJECTIVE: To find the lowest effective injection dose of abobotulinum toxin A (Dysport) for allergic rhinitis. STUDY DESIGN: Dose-escalation randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We included all patients aged 18 years or older who had persistent allergic rhinitis and positive allergy skin prick test. The patients were randomly allocated to receive 40, 30, or 20 U of abobotulinum toxin A by injection at the inferior turbinate. We followed up on patients for 12 weeks to evaluate nasal symptoms, ocular symptoms, minimum nasal cross-sectional area as measured using acoustic rhinometry, and complications. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were included in this study, with 7 receiving 20 U of abobotulinum toxin A and 5 each receiving 30 U and 40 U. Abobotulinum toxin A significantly improved nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and loss of smell at 40 U (P < .05) and nasal congestion, sneezing, and loss of smell at 30 U (P < .05). However, at a dose of 20 U, only nasal congestion and loss of smell improved (P < .05). Nasal patency had also significantly improved two weeks after treatment at doses of 40 and 30 U (P < .05). Complications included epistaxis (11.8%) and nasal dryness (23.5%). CONCLUSION: Abobotulinum toxin A at a dose of at least 30 U effectively reduced most nasal symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.in.th/ TCTR20200526014.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    A multicenter survey on the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices in rhinosinusitis patients
    Piromchai, P ; Puvatanond, C ; Kirtsreesakul, V ; Chaiyasate, S ; Suwanwech, T (WILEY, 2020-12)
    BACKGROUND: Nasal irrigation is widely used as an adjunctive treatment for rhinosinusitis. However, there is little information available regarding the efficacy of the devices used in this procedure. The objective of this study was thus to evaluate the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices based on the experiences of patients with rhinosinusitis. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter survey study between November 2017 and December 2019. The questionnaire was developed based on the available literature and expert opinion and submitted to the otolaryngology residents and staff of each center as well as those in their networks. RESULTS: Four hundred eighteen patients were enrolled in this study: 76 with acute viral rhinosinusitis (18%), 53 with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (13%), 156 with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (37%), and 133 with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (32%). We found that high-volume devices were most effective in helping to clear secretion in patients with acute viral rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps, and acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .017, .009, .002, respectively) and in reducing post-nasal drip in those with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (P = .040). There were no statistically significant differences among devices in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal irrigation with high-volume devices was an effective treatment for rhinosinusitis and was more effective at clearing nasal secretion and reducing post-nasal drip than that with other types of devices. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2C.