Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the great majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient's quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self-treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one-third of all otolaryngology-related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds. The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures. This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It will focus on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians with phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first-line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients, patients with hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT) and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function, are included in this guideline. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the working group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based upon their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS/UNASSIGNED:(7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) encompass histologically benign, dysplastic, and cancerous lesions that are often indistinguishable by appearance and inconsistently managed. We assessed the potential impact of test-and-treat pathways enabled by a point-of-care test for OPMD characterization. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We constructed a decision-analytic model to compare life expectancy of test-treat strategies for 60-year-old patients with OPMDs in the primary dental setting, based on a trial for a point-of-care cytopathology tool (POCOCT). Eight strategies of OPMD detection and evaluation were compared, involving deferred evaluation (no further characterization), prompt OPMD characterization using POCOCT measurements, or the commonly recommended usual care strategy of routine referral for scalpel biopsy. POCOCT pathways differed in threshold for additional intervention, including surgery for any dysplasia or malignancy, or for only moderate or severe dysplasia or cancer. Strategies with initial referral for biopsy also reflected varied treatment thresholds in current practice between surgery and surveillance of mild dysplasia. Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the impact of variation in parameter values on model results. RESULTS:Requisite referral for scalpel biopsy offered the highest life expectancy of 20.92 life-years compared with deferred evaluation (+0.30 life-years), though this outcome was driven by baseline assumptions of limited patient adherence to surveillance using POCOCT. POCOCT characterization and surveillance offered only 0.02 life-years less than the most biopsy-intensive strategy, while resulting in 27% fewer biopsies. When the probability of adherence to surveillance and confirmatory biopsy was ≥ 0.88, or when metastasis rates were lower than reported, POCOCT characterization extended life-years (+0.04 life-years) than prompt specialist referral. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Risk-based OPMD management through point-of-care cytology may offer a reasonable alternative to routine referral for specialist evaluation and scalpel biopsy, with far fewer biopsies. In patients who adhere to surveillance protocols, POCOCT surveillance may extend life expectancy beyond biopsy and follow up visual-tactile inspection.

Introduction: Non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) is an intracellular microorganism that causes cavitary disease and nodular bronchiectatic disease of the lung. Patients with NTM appear to have impaired swallow function as represented by impaired airway protection and pharyngeal bolus clearance. It is unknown whether impaired swallowing contributes to the pathophysiology of NTM. Our aim is to determine swallow physiology in patients with bronchiectasis and NTM compared with a control group.
Method(s): Video fluoroscopy (VF) was prospectively collected from 195 patients: 132 patients with NTM (90 females; ages 30-90) and 63 agematched and sex-matched controlswith noNTM(39 females; ages 27-92). Two boluses of 3, 5, 10ml thin liquid, two 5ml puree Varibar, and cracker were analyzed per subject (N = 1755 swallows). Outcome measures included ordinal ratings of residue in the valleculae and pyriform sinuses.
Result(s): Inter-and intra-rater reliability of the ordinal ratings were assessed using one-way mixed intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) (ICC(2,1)) on 20% of the data with good results (intra-rater: ICC = 0.92, 95% range CI 0.70-0.97 and inter-rater: ICC = 0.92, 95% range CI 0.81-0.97). The ratings of residue in the valleculae were significantly higher (worse) in the NTM group compared to the control group for one of the 3mL bolus (p = 0.008), for both 5 mL boluses (p = 0.009 and p = 0.004), both 10mL boluses (p = 0.0005 and p = 0.0006), puree (p = 0.006), cracker (p = 0.005). The ratings of residue in the pyriform sinuses were also significantly higher in the NTM group for 3 mL boluses (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.01), both 5 mL boluses (p = 0.0003 and p = 0.002), both 10mL boluses (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001), both puree trials (p<0.0001 and p<0.0001).
Conclusion(s): Future work is needed to elucidate responsiveness to swallowing treatment for patients with NTM

We present diagnostic criteria for mal de débarquement syndrome (MdDS) for inclusion into the International Classification of Vestibular Disorders. The criteria include the following: 1] Non-spinning vertigo characterized by an oscillatory sensation ('rocking,' 'bobbing,' or 'swaying,') present continuously or for most of the day; 2] Onset occurs within 48 hours after the end of exposure to passive motion, 3] Symptoms temporarily reduce with exposure to passive motion (e.g. driving), and 4] Symptoms persist for >48 hours. MdDS may be designated as "in evolution," if symptoms are ongoing but the observation period has been less than 1 month; "transient," if symptoms resolve at or before 1 month and the observation period extends at least to the resolution point; or "persistent" if symptoms last for more than 1 month. Individuals with MdDS may develop co-existing symptoms of spatial disorientation, visual motion intolerance, fatigue, and exacerbation of headaches or anxiety. Features that distinguish MdDS from vestibular migraine, motion sickness, and persistent postural perceptual dizziness (PPPD) are reviewed. Motion-moderated oscillatory vertigo can also occur without a motion trigger, typically following another vestibular disorder, a medical illness, heightened psychological stress, or metabolic disturbance. Terminology for this non-motion triggered presentation has been varied as it has features of both MdDS and PPPD. Further research is needed into its phenomenological and biological relationship to MdDS, PPPD, and other vestibular disorders.