Effectiveness of endoscopic versus external surgical approaches in the treatment of orbital complications of rhinosinusitis: a systematic review protocol.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE\nThis review aims to investigate and compare the effectiveness of endoscopic drainage techniques against external drainage techniques for the treatment of orbital and subperiosteal abscesses as a complication of rhinosinusitis.\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\nTransnasal endoscopic drainage and external drainage techniques have been used in the management of subperiosteal orbital abscesses secondary to rhinosinusitis. Each of these approaches has its own advantages and disadvantages, with extensive literature describing each technique separately. However, there is a lack of guidance in the studies for assessing and comparing the safety, effectiveness and suitability of these techniques. This review aims to compare the effectiveness of these techniques based on measuring outcomes in the literature such as: length of postoperative hospital stay, rate of revision surgery and complication rates.\n\n\nINCLUSION CRITERIA\nEligible studies will include people of all ages diagnosed with subperiosteal abscess, orbital abscess or cavernous sinus thrombosis (Chandler stages III-V) secondary to rhinosinusitis disease, who have also undergone drainage either via an endoscopic approach, external approach or combined surgical approach.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA comprehensive search of both published and unpublished literature will be performed to uncover studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Reference lists of studies included in final analysis will also be manually searched and subject matter experts contacted to investigate other sources of literature. Two reviewers will screen studies and a third reviewer will resolve disagreements. Studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analysis with heterogeneity of data being assessed using the standard Chi-squared and I tests.