Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 13223

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : November | Volume : 17 | Issue : 11 | Page : UC12 - UC16 Full Version

Prediction of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Cohort Study


Published: November 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/63831.18745
Pallavi Singh, Sarojini Bobde, Hemant Kumar Singh, Varinder Kalra

1. Final Year Resident, Department of Anaesthesia, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 2. Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 3. Consultant, Department of Ear, Nose and Throat, Combined Bedded Hospital, Atrauliya, Uttar Pradesh, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Correspondence Address :
Pallavi Singh,
B 38/210, A-3, Taradham Colony, Tulsipur, Mahmoorganj, Varanasi-221010, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: pallavisinghsjm@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Considering the pathophysiology of nasal obstruction, changes in certain parameters such as Peripheral Blood Eosinophil Count (PBEC), bedside pulmonary function test, Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR), and Electrocardiography (ECG) may have some correlation with postoperative pulmonary complications such as upper airway obstruction, loss of pharyngeal muscle tone, and postobstructive pulmonary oedema.

Aim: To observe and analyse the changes in PBEC, bedside pulmonary function test, PEFR, and ECG in patients undergoing Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS).

Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted at Bharati Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India over a two-year duration from December 2020 to October 2022. A total of 50 patients aged above 18 years undergoing FESS surgery were included in the study. The statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square test and student’s t-test. After thorough preoperative evaluation, the aforementioned predictors were recorded. General anaesthesia management for FESS surgery was done according to the standard protocol. Vigilant intraoperative monitoring of vital parameters including peak airway pressure and plateau pressure was performed. After shifting the patients to the recovery room, they were observed for: 1) Hypoxia; 2) Hypercarbia; 3) Laryngospasm; 4) Bronchospasm; and 5) Pulmonary oedema.

Results: A total of 50 patients aged between 18 years and 65 years with the mean age was 41.7±15.4 years were included in the study, with 32 males and 18 females. Only 24% of the study population showed postoperative hypoxia, while the rest of the complications were not observed in any patient. Changes in eosinophil count, PEFR, and ECG did not have any correlation with postoperative hypoxia and were statistically insignificant. Bedside pulmonary function tests, including the Sabrasez breath-holding test and the Sabrasez single breath count test, showed changes in 30% and 76% of patients, respectively. Forced Expiratory test change was seen in 72% of patients. Among these, 19.4% showed hypoxia. Out of the 12 cases showing postoperative hypoxia, seven had a disease duration of less than six months.

Conclusion: The Sabrasez breath-holding test and Sabrasez single breath count are good predictors for postoperative hypoxia in patients undergoing FESS surgery. Shorter duration of nasal obstruction also showed postoperative hypoxia.

Keywords

Peripheral blood eosinophil count, Postoperative hypoxia, Pulmonary function test

The internal ostium (or nasal valve) is the narrowest portion of the entire airway, accounting for approximately 50% of the total resistance to respiratory airflow. It plays a crucial role in preventing the collapse of the lower respiratory tract (1). Nasal obstruction can lead to increased oral breathing, reduced filtered air, and increased exposure of the lower airways to allergens, resulting in bronchial hyperresponsiveness and postoperative laryngospasm. Additionally, there is a possibility of undiagnosed obstructive sleep apnoea and the potential presence of the Samter triad (nasal polyps, asthma, and sensitivity to aspirin and NSAIDs), which may cause deadly bronchospasm (2). This occult pulmonary hypertension is more problematic than fully recognised disease because symptoms may be attributed to other diseases, and perioperative decompensation may occur unexpectedly, sometimes leading to right-sided heart failure (cor pulmonale) (3).

Patients who are muscularly healthy are at an increased risk of postobstructive pulmonary oedema due to their ability to generate significant inspiratory force. The resultant arterial hypoxaemia is usually observed within 90 minutes of upper airway obstruction (4). According to Westreich R et al., in 2006, surgical operations involving the upper aerodigestive tract have a higher risk of Negative Pressure Pulmonary Oedema (NPPE) than other procedures. Prompt diagnosis and treatment are required to prevent significant patient morbidity (5).

Many times, a young patient with shorter duration of nasal obstruction and classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) I/II, there is possibiity of inadequate counselling and optimisation. This study aimed to predict postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing FESS preoperatively using specific predictors, in order to avoid any untoward effects of these complications. The objective of this study is to predict the possibility of postoperative pulmonary complications (such as hypoxia, hypercarbia, bronchospasm, laryngospasm, and pulmonary oedema) using specific predictors, including: a) PBEC; b) Bedside pulmonary function test; c) PEFR; and d) ECG changes preoperatively in FESS patients.

Material and Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted at Department of Anaesthesia, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Pune, Maharashtra, India over a two-year duration from December 2020 to October 2022. This study was conducted after obtaining approval from the Institutional Ethical Committee (BVDUMC/IEC/71) and obtaining informed consent from each study participant who met the inclusion criteria, had nasal obstruction, and underwent FESS.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: The study included 50 patients aged over 18 years of both genders. Patients who were not willing to participate or had interstitial lung diseases, COPD, lung fibrosis, or cardiac diseases were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: It was calculated using the formula:

n={Z(α/2)2×SD}/d2

where n represents the sample size estimation, d is the allowable error, Zα/2 is the standard normal variate at a 5% level of significance, and SD is the standard deviation from previous studies (6).

Study Procedure

Specific evaluation: The investigator performed the following bedside pulmonary function tests preoperatively:

1) Sabrasez breath-holding test: The patient was asked to take a deep breath and hold it for as long as possible. A duration of >40 seconds was considered as normal cardiopulmonary reserve.
2) Sabrasez single breath count: The patient was asked to take a deep breath followed by counting 1, 2, 3, and so on until they could no longer hold their breath. A count of >30 indicated normal vital capacity.
3) Forced Expiratory Time (FET): The patient was asked to take a deep breath and exhale maximally and forcefully. A stethoscope was placed on the trachea to appreciate the exhalation sounds. A normal FET duration is 3-5 seconds (7).

Along with routine investigations, three specific investigations were recorded: PEFR, PBEC and ECG. The PEFR was measured using a Mini Wright peak expiratory flowmeter, as shown in (Table/Fig 1). The normal peak flow is 450-550 L/min in adult males and 320-470 L/min in adult females (8).

Raised PBEC (serum eosinophilia) was defined as an eosinophil count greater than 6% or >0.60 th/μL (9). Preoperative ECG changes, such as ST-T changes and T-wave changes, were recorded.

General anaesthesia management for FESS surgery followed the standard protocol. Induction was done with Inj. Propofol 2 mg/kg, and intubation was performed under the effect of Inj. Atracurium/Vecuronium. Maintenance was carried out with Sevoflurane 1-2% and Inj. Dexmedetomidine 0.5-1 mcg/kg as required.

Intraoperative monitoring of vital parameters, including pulse rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, end-tidal carbon dioxide, ECG, peak airway pressure, plateau pressure, and positive end-expiratory pressure, was conducted during induction, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours of surgery, and during reversal. Variations in these parameters and clinical findings in the cardiorespiratory system were recorded.

Following extubation, patients were observed for two hours in the Postoperative Care Unit (PACU) for the following:

1. Hypoxia
2. Hypercarbia
3. Laryngospasm
4. Bronchospasm
5. Pulmonary oedema.

Considering the residual effects of sedatives and oral breathing in FESS patients postoperatively, all patients received supplemental oxygen therapy with a Hudson mask at a rate of 4-5 litres per minute for the first hour. Hypoxia was detected using pulse oximetry, while continuous monitoring of hypercarbia was not possible. Laryngospasm, bronchospasm, and pulmonary oedema were ruled out through auscultation and clinical examination.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data. The mean and Standard Deviation (SD) were used to describe the numerical data, while frequency and percentage were used to describe categorical data. The intergroup statistical comparison of the distribution of categorical variables was tested using the Chi-square test. The inter-group statistical comparison of means for normally distributed continuous variables was performed using independent sample t-test. Throughout the entire study, a p-value <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. The data was analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS ver 22.0, IBM Corporation, USA) for MS Windows.

Results

In this study, the mean age was 41.7±15.4 years. Out of the 50 patients, 64% were male and 36% were female. There was no statistically significant difference observed in terms of age (p=0.32), gender (p=0.246), American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grading (p=0.171), and postoperative hypoxia. Only 24% of the patients experienced postoperative hypoxia. Among patients aged 18-30 years with a disease duration of less than six months, changes in predictors were observed. Out of the total 21 patients with a disease duration of less than six months, 7 (33%) experienced postoperative hypoxia, as shown in (Table/Fig 2).

(Table/Fig 3) displays the changes in eosinophil count, ranging from 7-13%, seen in 5 (10%) patients. Among them, 2 (40%) experienced hypoxia. PEFR change was observed in 31 (62%) patients, with 11 (35.4%) experiencing hypoxia. ECG changes were seen in 10 (20%) patients, with 2 (20%) experiencing hypoxia.

Bedside pulmonary function tests, including the Sabrasez breath-holding test, showed changes in 15 (30%) patients, among whom 8 (53.3%) experienced hypoxia. Changes in the Sabrasez single breath count test were observed in 38 (76%) patients, with 12 (31.5%) experiencing hypoxia. Forced expiratory test changes were seen in 36 (72%) patients, with 7 (19.4%) experiencing hypoxia, as shown in (Table/Fig 3).

(Table/Fig 4),(Table/Fig 5) indicate no significant changes in intraoperative parameters such as Pulse Rate (PR), Blood Pressure (BP), Respiratory Rate (RR), Oxygen Saturation (SpO2), End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide (ETCO2), peak airway pressure, and plateau pressure, monitored at various intervals. However, patients showed significant changes in postoperative parameters such as SpO2 (p-value=0.0018), RR (p-value=0.002), and postoperative oxygen requirement (p-value=0.0001), with no significant change in ETCO2 at different intervals.

Patients who experienced hypoxia showed a mean saturation of 92.75±2.3, which was statistically significant (p-value=0.001). These patients also exhibited an increased requirement for prolonged oxygen support, which was statistically significant (p-value=0.001), as shown in (Table/Fig 6).

(Table/Fig 7) demonstrates no statistically significant correlation between individual predictors and the duration of the disease. Only PBEC showed a positive correlation (r value=1) with disease duration, while the other predictors showed weakly negative or no correlation.

Discussion

Out of the 50 patients, 14 were in the age group of 18-30 years, and 10 were in the age group of 31-40 years. Even the younger age group displayed deranged predictor values preoperatively. Yancey KL et al., in 2019, stated that age may have a substantial impact on the pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis, the severity of symptoms (which is more common in the middle-aged group), and the outcomes of surgery. Older patients tend to report smaller improvements in disease-specific and general health quality of life after surgery (10).

A total of 21 (42%) patients had a disease duration of less than six months. In younger patients with a shorter disease duration, there is a possibility of failure to anticipate functional limitations and face critical situations without adequate preparation. The sudden hyperresponsiveness of the airways in the perioperative period and reduced hypoxic reserve in such patients can lead to postoperative pulmonary complications. Lukannek C et al., in 2019, stated that postoperative pulmonary complications are associated with an increase in mortality, morbidity, and healthcare utilisation. They validated the Score for the Prediction of Postoperative Respiratory Complications (SPORC-2), an instrument for stratified assessment of a patient’s risk of early tracheal reintubation after surgery. It may also prove beneficial in supporting clinicians in their efforts to advance patient safety and decrease the risk of early postoperative tracheal re-intubation (11).

In this study, five patients showed eosinophil count changes ranging from 7-13%. A similar study conducted by Bachert C et al., in 2000, stated that eosinophils are the major effector cells in the pathogenesis of nasal polyps (12).

In this study, PEFR changes were observed in 36 patients. Out of these, a total of 25 had a disease duration of less than 12 months (p-value=0.05). Among them, 10 (27.8%) experienced hypoxia. Additionally, 28 patients (56%) had PEFR values ranging from 250-350 L/min, and 9 (75%) of them experienced hypoxia. Eight patients (16%) displayed reduced PEFR values <250 L/min preoperatively, and 2 (16.7%) of them experienced hypoxia. Therefore, even in patients with a shorter duration of disease, the respiratory system does not function optimally during anaesthesia management. In 2005, Dikshit MB et al., stated that PEFR is a measurement of ventilatory function and was accepted as an index of spirometry in 1949. By definition, it is “The largest expiratory flow rate achieved with a maximally forced effort from a position of maximal inspiration, expressed in litres/min” (13). Sitalaxmi R et al., in 2013, stated that the functioning of the larger airways is reflected by PEFR, and any stress, infection, or inflammation in these airways can cause adverse reactions (8). Ehnhage A et al., in 2009, concluded that FESS has beneficial effects on asthma in patients with nasal polyposis, as it improves asthma symptoms, PEFR, and olfaction (14).

Out of the 10 patients displaying preoperative ECG changes (T wave inversion and ST-T changes), six of them had a disease duration of less than 12 months. Among them, 2 (20%) experienced hypoxia. Bhattacharyya N in 2020 stated that Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS) alone does not objectively contribute to systemic hypoxaemia, although a subset of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis (CRSwNP) may have abnormally low SpO2, possibly warranting SpO2 assessment in such patients (15). Fidan V and Aksakal E, in 2011, stated that upper respiratory tract obstruction has been reported to increase mean Pulmonary Artery Pressure (mPAP), leading to pulmonary hypertension and cor pulmonale. Surgical intervention improves mPAP, pulmonary function tests, and oxygen saturation (16). S¸ ims¸ ek E et al., in 2017, stated that treatment of upper airway obstruction in adult patients with nasal polyps may result in improved right ventricular systolic functions and provide a substantial decrease in Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure (PASP) values (6).

The changes observed in the Sabrasez breath-holding test and Sabrasez single breath count test were significant. Out of 50 patients, a change in the forced expiratory test was seen in 36 patients. Among them, 26 had a disease duration of less than 12 months. These patients showed a forced expiratory test of >6 seconds, suggesting obstructive lung disease. Additionally, 7 of these patients (58.3%) showed hypoxia. A total of 14 patients had a normal forced expiratory test ranging from 3 to 5 seconds, and 5 of them (41.6%) showed hypoxia. It is important to note that the number of cases included was limited due to availability. The duration of the disease did not significantly impact the predictor change, as changes were observed in both patients with disease duration <12 months and >12 months, with a non significant p-value.

Zhang L et al., proposed that a decrease in FEV1 and FEV25-75 was more frequent in patients with raised PBEC (peripheral blood eosinophil count) who had CRSwNP. This suggests that PBEC in these patients can reflect decreased lung function (17). In a study conducted by Karuthedath S et al., preoperative pulmonary function tests were compared with postoperative values in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. It was concluded that chronic rhinosinusitis affected patients in their fourth decade of life. Furthermore, there was a significant improvement in the FEV1/FVC ratio postoperatively in the third month (18).

In 2000, Lamblin C et al., stated that patients with steroids non responsive Nasal Polyposis (NP) treated by nasal surgery were associated with a progressive decline in FEV1 and the appearance of airflow obstruction four years after intranasal ethmoidectomy, regardless of the existence of non specific Bronchial Hyper-Responsiveness (BHR) (19). Therefore, anticipation of functional limitation of the cardiorespiratory system and adequately preparing with predictors is the wise approach. Lee SY et al., concluded that decreased lung function was correlated with CT findings suggesting chronic sinusitis and nasal polyps in subjects without lower respiratory disease, and the severity of CT findings of sinusitis was related to the degree of airway obstruction (20). Additional relevant information regarding the airway can be obtained from X-ray head and neck and Computed Tomography (CT) scan findings, which are usually performed preoperatively by the surgeon.

Limitation(s)

A limited number of cases were included in the study due to Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19), and cases complicated by COVID-19 infection were not considered. Continuous monitoring of end-tidal CO2 on spontaneous ventilation was unavailable, and the minimal oxygen requirement for individual patients could not be assessed due to the inability to use nasal prongs.

Conclusion

Preoperative risk anticipation can be achieved with the help of predictors such as the Sabrasez single breath count and Sabrasez breath-holding test to assess postoperative hypoxia in patients undergoing FESS. Additionally, these patients may require oxygen support for a longer duration. Other predictors, such as Peripheral Blood Eosinophil Count (PBEC), Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR), and ECG changes, did not show a significant change in relation to this sample size. Interestingly, even patients with a shorter duration of disease (<6 months) exhibited changes in these predictors.

References

1.
Galm T, Ahmed SK. Physiology of the nose and paranasal sinuses. In: John C Watkinson, Raymond W Clarke (Eds).Scott-Brown’s Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 8th ed. Florida: CRC Press; 2018. Pp. 983-89. [crossref]
2.
Doyle DJ. Anesthesia for Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery. Miller’s Anesthesia. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2015.
3.
Duminda N. Wijeysundera, Bobbie-Jean Sweitzer. Preoperative Evaluation. Miller’s Anesthesia. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2015.
4.
Nicholau TK. The postanaesthesia care unit. Miller’s Anesthesia. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2015.
5.
Westreich R, Sampson I, Shaari CM, Lawson W. Negative-pressure pulmonary edema after routine septorhinoplasty: Discussion of pathophysiology, treatment, and prevention. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006;8(1):08-15. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
S¸ ims¸ ek E, Demirelli S, S¸ ims¸ ek Z, I?pek E, Bingöl F, Koza Y, et al. The effect of functional endoscopic sinus surgery on right ventricular function in patients with nasal polyps. The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat. 2017;27(1):10-14. [crossref]
7.
Bhavna G, Lalit G. Pulmonary function tests-relevance to anesthesiologists. Anaesth Critic Care Med J. 2018;3(1):000131. [crossref]
8.
Sitalakshmi R, Poornima KN, Karthick N. The Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR): The effect of stress in a geriatric population of Chennai-A pilot study. J Clin Diag Res. 2013;7(2):409-10.
9.
Ganti A, Kuhar HN, Eggerstedt M, Mahdavinia M, Gattuso P, Batra PS, et al. The association of serum eosinophilia with structured histopathology in chronic rhinosinusitis. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 2020;129(5):512-16. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Yancey KL, Lowery AS, Chandra RK, Chowdhury NI, Turner JH. Advanced age adversely affects chronic rhinosinusitis surgical outcomes. In International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. 2019;9(10):1125-34. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Lukannek C, Shaefi S, Platzbecker K, Raub D, Santer P, Nabel S. The development and validation of the Score for the Prediction of Postoperative Respiratory Complications (SPORC-2) to predict the requirement for early postoperative tracheal re-intubation: A hospital registry study. Anaesthesia. 2019;74(9):1165-74. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Bachert C, Gevaert P, Holtappels G, Cuvelier C, Van Cauwenberge P. Nasal polyposis: From cytokines to growth. American Journal of Rhinology. 2000;14(5):279-90. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Dikshit MB, Raje S, Agrawal MJ. Lung functions with spirometry: An Indian perspective-I. Peak expiratory flow rates. Indian J Physiol Pharmacol. 2005;49(1):08-18.
14.
Ehnhage A, Olsson P, Kölbeck KG, Skedinger M, Dahlen B, Ålenius M, et al. NAF2S2 Study Group. Functional endoscopic sinus surgery improved asthma symptoms as well as PEFR and olfaction in patients with nasal polyposis. Allergy. 2009;64(5):762-69. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Bhattacharyya N. Does chronic rhinosinusitis relate to systemic hypoxemia? Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology. 2020;5(5):809-12. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Fidan V, Aksakal E. Impact of septoplasty on pulmonary artery pressure in patients with markedly deviated septum. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2011;22(5):1591-93. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Zhang L, Zhang L, Zhang CH, Fang XB, Huang ZX, Shi QY. The lung function impairment in non-atopic patients with chronic rhinosinusitis and its correlation analysis. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology. 2016;9(4):339-45. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Karuthedath S, Singh I, Chadha S. Impact of functional endoscopic sinus surgery on the pulmonary function of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis: A prospective study. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery. 2014;66(4):441-48. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Lamblin C, Brichet A, Perez T, Darras J, Tonnel AB, Wallaert B. Long-term follow-up of pulmonary function in patients with nasal polyposis. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2000;161(2):406-13. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Lee SY, Yoon SH, Song WJ, Lee SH, Kang HR, Kim SS, et al. Influence of chronic sinusitis and nasal polyp on the lower airway of subjects without lower airway diseases. Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research. 2014;6(4):310-15.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/63831.18745

Date of Submission: Feb 28, 2023
Date of Peer Review: May 22, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Oct 11, 2023
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2023

Author declaration:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 04, 2023
• Manual Googling: Apr 14, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Oct 07, 2023 (9%)

Etymology: Author Origin

Emendations: 9

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com