Background: Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT (Open AI), are increasingly used in medicine and supplement standard search engines as information sources. This leads to more “consultations” of LLMs about personal medical symptoms. Objective: This study aims to evaluate ChatGPT’s performance in answering clinical case–based questions in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) in comparison to ORL consultants’ answers. Methods: We used 41 case-based questions from established ORL study books and past German state examinations for doctors. The questions were answered by both ORL consultants and ChatGPT 3. ORL consultants rated all responses, except their own, on medical adequacy, conciseness, coherence, and comprehensibility using a 6-point Likert scale. They also identified (in a blinded setting) if the answer was created by an ORL consultant or ChatGPT. Additionally, the character count was compared. Due to the rapidly evolving pace of technology, a comparison between responses generated by ChatGPT 3 and ChatGPT 4 was included to give an insight into the evolving potential of LLMs. Results: Ratings in all categories were significantly higher for ORL consultants (P<.001). Although inferior to the scores of the ORL consultants, ChatGPT’s scores were relatively higher in semantic categories (conciseness, coherence, and comprehensibility) compared to medical adequacy. ORL consultants identified ChatGPT as the source correctly in 98.4% (121/123) of cases. ChatGPT’s answers had a significantly higher character count compared to ORL consultants (P<.001). Comparison between responses generated by ChatGPT 3 and ChatGPT 4 showed a slight improvement in medical accuracy as well as a better coherence of the answers provided. Contrarily, neither the conciseness (P=.06) nor the comprehensibility (P=.08) improved significantly despite the significant increase in the mean amount of characters by 52.5% (n= (1470-964)/964; P<.001). Conclusions: While ChatGPT provided longer answers to medical problems, medical adequacy and conciseness were significantly lower compared to ORL consultants’ answers. LLMs have potential as augmentative tools for medical care, but their “consultation” for medical problems carries a high risk of misinformation as their high semantic quality may mask contextual deficits.

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis is regarded as a chronic airway disease. According to WHO recommendations, it may be a risk factor for COVID‐19 patients. In most CRSwNP cases, the inflammatory changes affecting the nasal and paranasal mucous membranes are type‐2 (T2) inflammation endotypes.Methods: The current knowledge on COVID‐19 and on treatment options for CRS was analyzed by a literature search in Medline, Pubmed, international guidelines, the Cochrane Library and the Internet.Results: Based on international literature, on current recommendations by WHO and other international organizations as well as on previous experience, a panel of experts from EAACI and ARIA provided recommendations for the treatment of CRS during the COVID‐19 pandemic.Conclusion: Intranasal corticosteroids remain the standard treatment for CRS in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Surgical treatments should be reduced to a minimum and surgery preserved for patients with local complications and for those with no other treatment options. Systemic corticosteroids should be avoided. Treatment with biologics can be continued with careful monitoring in noninfected patients and should be temporarily interrupted during the course of the COVID‐19 infection.

Purpose: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with severe daytime sleepiness and reduced quality of life. These symptoms are also present in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) before, during and after treatment, so that comorbidity cannot be excluded. The aim was to evaluate the prevalence of OSA and its impact on the quality of life in patients with oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal and lateral tongue SCCHN in a prospective study. Methods: We performed cardiorespiratory home sleep apnea testing and recorded sleep-related patient-reported outcomes in 33 patients with confirmed oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal and lateral tongue SCCHN. We correlated the sleep-related variables to oncologic variables and endpoints. Results: Five female and 28 male patients with SCCHN (aged 46–77 years) were recruited. Thirty patients (90%) had OSA as defined by an Apnea/Hypopnea Index (AHI) > 5 /h before treatment. Evaluation after treatment, which was possible in 17 patients, showed OSA in 16 patients (94%). Radiologic primary tumor size showed significant positive correlation with AHI and apnea-index. Tumor recurrence and tumor-related mortality showed significant positive association with AHI. PSQI of these patients showed at least a moderate sleep disturbance. EORTC QLQ c30 questionnaire showed reduced values for all tested qualities, in particular for fatigue, insomnia, pain and financial distress. Conclusion: Obstructive sleep apnea is a significant comorbidity in patients with SCCHN. Pre-interventional AHI may be correlated with the oncologic outcome. Further research is needed to further describe the course of OSA and its treatment before, during and after therapy.

Background: We investigated whether the number, duration and intensity of respiratory arousals (RA) on C3-electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings correlate with polysomnography (PSG)-related disease severity in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. We also investigated if every patient might have an individual RA microstructure pattern, independent from OSA-severity. Methods: PSG recordings of 20 OSA patients (9 female; age 27–80 years) were analyzed retrospectively. Correlation coefficients were calculated between RA microstructure (duration, EEG-intensity) and RA number and respiratory disturbance index (RDI), oxygen desaturation index (ODI) and arousal index (AI). Intraclass correlations (ICC) for both RA duration and intensity were calculated. Sleep stage-specific and apnea- and hypopnea-specific analyses were also done. The probability distributions of duration and intensity were plotted, interpolated with a kernel which fits the distribution. A Bayesian posterior distribution analysis and pair-wise comparisons of each patient with all other 19 patients were performed. Results: Of the analyzed 2600 RA, strong positive correlations were found between average RA intensity and both RDI and AI. The number of PSG-recorded RA was strongly positively correlated with RDI. Significant correlations between average RA intensity in REM, NREM2 and NREM3 sleep stages and total ODI were identified. No sleep stage-specific correlations of arousal microstructure with age, sex, RDI or AI were identified. Although between-subjects ICC values were 0.7 (all p < 0.05). While apnea-related RA duration did not differ from hypopnea-related RA duration, RA intensity was significantly higher (p = 0.00135) in hypopneas than in apneas. A clear individual pattern of arousal duration for each patient was made distinct. For arousal intensity, a Gaussian distribution was identified in most patients. The Bayesian statistics regarding the arousal microstructure showed significant differences between each pair of patients. Conclusions: Each individual patient with OSA might have an individual pattern of RA intensity and duration indicating a distinct individual pathophysiological feature. Arousal intensity was significantly higher in hypopneic than in apneic events and may be related causally to the diminished (compared to apneas) respiratory distress associated with hypopneas. RA intensity in REM, NREM2 and NREM3 strongly correlated with ODI.

Obstructive sleep apnea is the most common type of sleep-disordered breathing with growing prevalence. Its presence has been associated with poor quality of life and serious comorbidities. There is increasing evidence for coexisting obstructive sleep apnea in patients suffering from head and neck cancer, a condition that ranks among the top ten most common types of cancer worldwide. Routinely, patients with head and neck cancer are treated with surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy or a combination of these, all possibly interfering with the anatomy of the oral cavity, pharynx or larynx. Thus, cancer treatment might worsen already existing obstructive sleep apnea or trigger its occurrence. Hypoxia, the hallmark feature of obstructive sleep apnea, has an impact on cancer biology and its cure. Early diagnosis and sufficient treatment of coexisting obstructive sleep apnea in patients with head and neck cancer may improve quality of life and could also potentially improve oncological outcomes.