Background: Sinonasal neoplasms, whether benign and malignant, pose a significant challenge to clinicians and represent a model area for multidisciplinary collaboration in order to optimize patient care. The International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Sinonasal Tumors (ICSNT) aims to summarize the best available evidence and presents 48 thematic and histopathology‐based topics spanning the field.Methods: In accordance with prior International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology documents, ICSNT assigned each topic as an Evidence‐Based Review with Recommendations, Evidence‐Based Review, and Literature Review based on the level of evidence. An international group of multidisciplinary author teams were assembled for the topic reviews using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses format, and completed sections underwent a thorough and iterative consensus‐building process. The final document underwent rigorous synthesis and review prior to publication.Results: The ICSNT document consists of four major sections: general principles, benign neoplasms and lesions, malignant neoplasms, and quality of life and surveillance. It covers 48 conceptual and/or histopathology‐based topics relevant to sinonasal neoplasms and masses. Topics with a high level of evidence provided specific recommendations, while other areas summarized the current state of evidence. A final section highlights research opportunities and future directions, contributing to advancing knowledge and community intervention.Conclusion: As an embodiment of the multidisciplinary and collaborative model of care in sinonasal neoplasms and masses, ICSNT was designed as a comprehensive, international, and multidisciplinary collaborative endeavor. Its primary objective is to summarize the existing evidence in the field of sinonasal neoplasms and masses.

Objectives: Surgical repair of nasal septal perforations (NSPs) is technically challenging. Advantages associated with endoscopic NSP repair (ENSPR) include enhanced visualization and its minimally invasive nature. Purely endoscopic techniques have successful outcomes with low morbidity. This study provides a review of clinical features, surgical techniques, and outcomes in patients who underwent ENSPR. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and Embase databases. Manual bibliography search produced additional articles. Studies reporting purely endoscopic approaches for NSP repair were included. Patient demographics, NSP size, etiology, repair strategy, incidence of closure, and follow-up were analyzed. Results: A total of 329 cases from 20 studies were included. The mean age was 37.2 years (range, 12.3-51 years) and 55.0% were male. Common etiologies were iatrogenic (n = 180, 60.0%), trauma (n = 66, 22.0%), and idiopathic (n = 36, 12.0%). The mean NSP size was 17.1 mm (range, 4-23). Repair techniques included unilateral random pattern flaps (n = 205, 62.3%), interposition grafts (n = 137, 41.6%), and unilateral axial pedicled local flaps (n = 81, 24.6%). 222 patients (67.5%) underwent a 2-layered repair, while 70 (21.3%) and 37 (11.2%) patients underwent single and 3-layered repairs, respectively. Successful closure was achieved in 296 patients (90.0%). When stratified by layers of repair, 65 single-layered (92.9%), 196 2-layered (88.3%), and 34 3-layered repairs (91.9%) were successful at a mean follow-up of 16.3 months (range, 3-31 months). Conclusions: ENSPR generally achieves NSP closure with high rates of success among varying types of repairs. Further studies may determine how clinical factors and surgical methods impact the likelihood of obtaining successful closure.