BackgroundBleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) can impair visualization and delay surgical progress. The role that anesthetic technique may have on the quality of surgical field during ESS has been previously studied. However, meta‐analyses have deemed the current literature inconclusive and lacking methodological consistency. This study was designed with these critiques in mind to assess the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs inhaled anesthetic on the quality of the surgical field during ESS.MethodsThis study was a double‐blind, randomized, controlled trial of 30 patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 1 or 2 undergoing bilateral ESS for the primary diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis. In addition to standard techniques to minimize blood loss, study patients were randomized to maintenance anesthesia with intravenous propofol or inhaled desflurane. Anesthetic depth was standardized using bispectral index (BIS). The primary outcome measured was the Wormald grading scale to assess the endoscopic surgical field.ResultsThe use of TIVA was associated with a statistically significant reduction in mean Wormald score compared to desflurane (4.21 vs 5.53, p = 0.024). Mean Boezaart score was also lower in the TIVA arm (2.18 vs 2.76, p = 0.034). Experimental groups were homogeneous in all compared baseline characteristics. Secondary outcomes including surgical duration, time to extubation, and estimated blood loss were not found to be statistically significant between experimental groups.ConclusionEven with all other factors implemented to optimize the surgical field, utilization of TIVA vs inhaled anesthetic still resulted in a statistically significant improvement in surgical field during ESS.

Background Bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) can hinder surgical progress and may be associated with increased complications. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic that is known to reduce operative bleeding. The current study was designed to assess the effect of adjunctive intravenous tranexamic acid on intraoperative bleeding and the quality of the surgical field during ESS. Methods Double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Patients undergoing ESS for the primary diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis with or without polyposis were included. Sample size calculation based on a clinically relevant difference in the Wormald surgical field score yielded a sample of 28. In addition to standard measures to minimize blood loss, study patients received intravenous tranexamic acid with control patients receiving intravenous normal saline. Outcome measures included the Wormald grading scale to assess the intraoperative surgical field and estimated blood loss based on suction container contents with irrigation fluid subtracted. Results Twenty-eight patients (median age, 45 years; range, 2380 years) were included in the study. Diagnoses included chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis (n = 5), chronic rhinosinusitis with polyposis (n = 23). The use of the tranexamic acid was not associated with a statistically significant decrease in estimated blood loss (201 vs 231 mL; p = 0.60) or Wormald grading scale (5.84 vs 5.80; p = 0.93). There were no adverse events or complications during the study. Conclusion Adjunctive intravenous tranexamic acid does not appear to result in a clinically meaningful reduction in blood loss or improve visualization of the surgical field during ESS. (C) 2013 ARS-AAOA, LLC.