The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise . The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. The full document can be downloaded for free on the website of this journal: http://www.rhinologyjournal.com.

I. Executive Summary: Background: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document.Methods: ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary.Results: ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided.Conclusion: This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

Olfactory dysfunction is an increasingly recognised condition, associated with reduced quality of life and major health outcomes such as neurodegeneration and death. However, translational research in this field is limited by heterogeneity in methodological approach, including definitions of impairment, improvement and appropriate assessment techniques. Accordingly, effective treatments for smell loss are limited. In an effort to encourage high quality and comparable work in this field, among others, we propose the following ideas and recommendations. Whilst the full set of recommendations are outlined in the main document, points include the following: • Patients with suspected olfactory loss should undergo a full examination of the head and neck, including rigid nasal endoscopy with small diameter endoscopes. • Subjective olfactory assessment should not be undertaken in isolation, given its poor reliability. • Psychophysical assessment tools used in clinical and research settings should include reliable and validated tests of odour threshold, and/or one of odour identification or discrimination. • Comprehensive chemosensory assessment should include gustatory screening. • Smell training can be helpful in patients with olfactory loss of several aetiologies. We hope the current manuscript will encourage clinicians and researchers to adopt a common language, and in so doing, increase the methodological quality, consistency and generalisability of work in this field.

Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments, such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation, and initial results of a multilingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in 3 distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, and 8 others, aged 19–79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste, and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (−79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± standard deviation), taste (−69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (−37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and the lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus strain 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.

Clinical trials in renal transplantation must use surrogate markers of long-term graft survival if conclusions are to be drawn at acceptable speed and cost. Morphologic changes in transplant biopsies provide the earliest available evidence of damage, and "protocol" biopsies from stable grafts can be used to reduce the number of patients needed in clinical trials. This approach has been inhibited by concerns over safety, but the risk of biopsy of a stable kidney, with no active inflammation or acute functional impairment, has never been formally estimated. In accordance with a predefined set of questions, a retrospective audit of a sequential series of protocol biopsies was performed in four major transplant centers. A total of 2,127 biopsy events were assessed for major complications, and 1,486 were assessed for minor ones. There were no deaths. One graft was lost, under circumstances indicating that the loss should have been prevented. Three episodes of hemorrhage required direct intervention. Three further patients required transfusion. There were two episodes of peritonitis, but one was arguably an unrelated event. All serious complications presented within 4 hr of biopsy. The incidence of clinically significant complications after protocol biopsy of a stable renal transplant is low. Direct benefits to the patients concerned (irrespective of the benefit that may accrue in clinical trials) were not formally assessed but seem likely to outweigh the risk of the procedure. We believe that it is ethically justifiable to ask renal transplant recipients to undergo protocol biopsies in clinical trials and routine care.

Olfactory dysfunction is an increasingly recognised condition, associated with reduced quality of life and major health outcomes such as neurodegeneration and death. However, translational research in this field is limited by heterogeneity in methodological approach, including definitions of impairment, improvement and appropriate assessment techniques. Accordingly, effective treatments for smell loss are limited. In an effort to encourage high quality and comparable work in this field, among others, we propose the following ideas and recommendations. Whilst the full set of recommendations are outlined in the main document, points include the following: - Patients with suspected olfactory loss should undergo a full examination of the head and neck, including rigid nasal endoscopy with small diameter endoscopes. - Subjective olfactory assessment should not be undertaken in isolation, given its poor reliability. - Psychophysical assessment tools used in clinical and research settings should include reliable and validated tests of odour threshold, and/or one of odour identification or discrimination. - Comprehensive chemosensory assessment should include gustatory screening. - Smell training can be helpful in patients with olfactory loss of several aetiologies. We hope the current manuscript will encourage clinicians and researchers to adopt a common language, and in so doing, increase the methodological quality, consistency and generalisability of work in this field.