Background: Complete removal of some maxillary sinus pathologies may be challenging. We describe our experience in performing endoscopic inferior meatal antrostomy (EIMA) when approaching certain chronic maxillary sinus disease. Methods: Retrospectively reviewing charts of all patients whose surgery included EIMA between the years 2012 and 2015. EIMA was performed either after routine endoscopic middle meatal antrostomy (EMMA) failed to completely resect the lesion, or as the sole selected approach for specific maxillary pathologies. Results: A total of 56 patients were included in the study. Indications for EIMA included antrochoanal polyps (ACP), maxillary sinus chronic inflammatory disease, maxillary sinus pathology before sinus lift, and odontogenic maxillary sinusitis. In nearly one third of the patients, sinus surgery included only EIMA, of which, the majority were resection of ACP. Follow-up time ranged between 12 and 34 months (mean 14). Residual EIMA opening was variable in size. In the vast majority of our patients, the maxillary sinus cavities were cleared of disease. No major complications and no recirculation were observed in any of the patients. Conclusion: EIMA should be considered for various maxillary sinus pathologies. It provides better access to anteroinferior lesions of the maxillary sinus. EMMA is not mandatory for every maxillary sinus disease.

Background: Endoscopic middle meatal antrostomy (EMMA) is considered the standard approach for surgical management of antrochoanal polyps (ACPs). Recently, an endoscopic inferior meatal antrostomy (EIMA) approach for clearing lesions in the maxillary sinus was described. In this study, we compared the long-term outcome of patients with ACP following surgical treatment using one of these 2 approaches (EIMA or EMMA). Methods: The medical charts of all patients treated for ACPs in our institution between January 1, 2009, and July 1, 2020, were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were invited to complete a long-term follow-up assessment. Results: Thirty-eight patients were included in the study: EIMA was the only procedure performed in 25 patients (66%) and EMMA was the only procedure performed in 7 patients (18%). Both procedures were performed in 6 patients (16%): 2 patients (5%) underwent simultaneous EMMA and EIMA for better access and visualization and 4 patients (10.5%) underwent surgical revision consisting of EIMA secondary to failed EMMA at other institutions. Median follow-up was 44 months (range, 6 months–11 years). No evidence of recurrent ACPs, recirculation, synechiae, nasolacrimal duct injury, or bleeding was observed in any of our patients. Small nonobstructing cysts were observed in 2 patients (8%) following EIMA. Conclusions: EIMA prevents violation of the ostiomeatal complex. It provides access to the anteroinferior aspect of the maxillary sinus and should be considered as an alternative to EMMA in patients with ACPs.

Background: The modified Blair incision is the standard facial incision for the vast majority of parotid gland lesions. We utilize three types of incisions: “classic mini-Blair” for parotid body tumors, “cervical mini-Blair” for parotid tail tumors, and “vertical mini-Blair” for anterior parotid tumors. In this study, we describe the surgical and esthetic outcomes of these individually tailored incisions. Methods: Patients undergoing parotidectomy between 2011 and 2013 were included. The surgical outcomes and patients’ satisfaction were assessed. Results: Of 122 patients, 89 were included. All patients completed a questionnaire assessing the postoperative course and patients’ satisfaction regarding the surgery in general and the scar in particular. Among these patients, 78 (87%) had a benign pathology and 11 (13%) had malignant tumors. The tumors were located at the parotid body in 57 patients (64%), at the parotid tail in 19 (21%), at the deep lobe in 8 (9%), and at the anterior parotid gland in 5 (6%). All tumors were removed successfully with negative margins on pathology. No inadvertent permanent facial nerve paralysis occurred. The median operation time was 72 min (23–211). The average patient scores of satisfaction with the surgical scar and with the surgery were 9.54 and 9.72, respectively. Conclusions: Individualized mini-Blair incision is feasible for benign as well as selected malignant parotid tumors.

Ectopic teeth in maxillary sinus is rare and are usually removed via sub-labial trans-canine fossa approach (SLCFA). The aim of our study was to present our experience with extraction of ectopic teeth in the maxillary sinus via transnasal endoscopic approach (TEA). Rhinologists were asked to share their experience in the management of ectopic teeth in the maxillary sinus. Data were reviewed retrospectively. Eleven cases were reported in 10 patients from 2010 to 2019, six males and four females with a mean age of 33.5 +/-17 years (range 16 to 61). Seven patients complained of sinonasal symptoms, two were diagnosed incidentally during routine dental work-up, and one had oro-antral fistula. In eight patients, a cyst coexisted within the maxillary sinus. Teeth were located arbitrarily within the sinus. All cases were operated by TEA. One patient had self-limited periorbital emphysema, one had transient cheek numbness, and one had early post-operative bleeding that stopped after endoscopic cauterization. Long-term follow-up revealed good clinical outcomes. Transnasal endoscopic removal of ectopic teeth from the maxillary sinus is a feasible and rational approach when SLCFA is contraindicated. Key words:Ectopic teeth, dentigerous cyst, endoscopic sinus surgery, Caldwell-Luc.