Rate of dupilumab use and symptom severity of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis after Draf 3 frontal sinusotomy

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe indications for endoscopic modified Lothrop procedure (Draf 3) in patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) remain unclear. This study evaluates the effectiveness of Draf 3 for refractory CRSwNP focusing on improvements in disease severity and need for subsequent dupilumab rescue therapy.MethodsRetrospective review of patients with CRSwNP undergoing Draf 3 surgery at a tertiary center between 2012 and 2022. Clinicodemographic variables were compared across those who did versus did not require rescue with postoperative dupilumab. Time to postoperative dupilumab rescue was analyzed and longitudinal disease‐specific outcomes were measured using the sinonasal outcomes test (SNOT‐22).ResultsWithin 87 patients with CRSwNP, 24.1% had aspirin‐exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). Significant improvement in SNOT‐22 score was found in CRSwNP with AERD (p < 0.001) and without AERD (p = 0.01) up to 24 months postoperative. 14.9% eventually required rescue with a dupilumab. More specifically, of 21 patients with AERD, 24.1% eventually required rescue with dupilumab. Dupilumab rescue was associated with a greater number of prior sinus surgeries (p = 0.02), prior aspirin desensitization (p = 0.02), and worse preoperative Lund‐MacKay scores (p < 0.001). No association between biologic rescue and frontal recess antero‐posterior diameter was found (p = 0.20).ConclusionsDraf 3 surgery in CRSwNP was associated with significant improvement in SNOT‐22 score at 24 months. Furthermore, only 14.9% of patients required dupilumab rescue. Patients with AERD were more likely to require rescue with dupilumab even though 75.1% avoided treatment with the biologic over the study period.