This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Paranasal Sinus Disease  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;131:531-532.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Sillers has done an excellent job of summarizing the critical issues for and against frontal sinus obliteration. His account is an accurate and nonbiased review of the pertinent data, and I concur with him that the strength of the indications for frontal sinus obliteration continues to wane.

Figure appears in full text version. Donald C. Lanza, MD

In general, 5 premises establish the best paradigm for the surgical management of frontal sinus disease: (1) Restoring frontal sinus function is preferred to ablation or obliteration. (2) Minimally invasive techniques are typically associated with less lost work time for the patient. (3) Ability to postoperatively monitor residual or recurrent disease is greatest (endoscopically or via imaging) when frontal sinus function is restored. (4) The need for postoperative endoscopic wound care can be more labor intensive when function is restored. (5) In experienced hands, complication rates with ablation procedures are comparable to or even higher than those associated with . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Donald C. Lanza, MD

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?