The diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis was statistically different between the three methods. It was higher in imaging analysis and lower in questionnaire. The nasal endoscopy is an excellent method to evaluate nasossinusal disease in cystic fibrosis.

The sinonasal involvement is one of the most common manifestations in cystic fibrosis. Data show a high incidence of chronic rhinosinusitis in these patients. Although it has been found radiographic opacification of the sinus in more than 90% of cases, few are symptomatic. So that, it is difficult to recognize nasossinusal disease in patients with cystic fibrosis. Questionnaire, nasal endoscopy and CT-scan are very important methods in this approach. Aim: To evaluate the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis in patients with cystic fibrosis by anamnesis, nasal endoscopy and CT-scan and compare those results. Study Design: Clinical prospective. Material and Method: Evaluation of 34 patients -older than 6 years and with a confirmed diagnoses of cystic fibrosis -by anamnesis (questionnaire), nasal endoscopy (score Lund-Kennedy) and CT-scan (score Lund-Mackay). Results: chronic rhinosinusitis was confirmed in: 20,58% of cases by the questionnaire, 73,52% of the cases by the nasal endoscopy and in 93,54% of the cases by the CT-scan. The results showed significant differences. The correlation between nasal endoscopy score (Lund-Kennedy score) and CT-scan score (Lund-Mackay score) was statistically significant. Conclusion: The diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis was statistically different between the three methods. It was higher in imaging analysis and lower in questionnaire. The nasal endoscopy is an excellent method to evaluate nasossinusal disease in cystic fibrosis

Summary Mortality and morbidity for high‐risk surgical patients are often high, especially in low‐resource settings. Enhanced peri‐operative care has the potential to reduce preventable deaths but must be designed to meet local needs. This before‐and‐after cohort study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a postoperative 48‐hour enhanced care pathway for high‐risk surgical patients (‘high‐risk surgical bundle’) who did not meet the criteria for elective admission to intensive care. The pathway comprised of six elements: risk identification and communication; adoption of a high‐risk post‐anaesthesia care unit discharge checklist; prompt nursing admission to ward; intensification of vital signs monitoring; troponin measurement; and prompt access to medical support if required. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Data describing 1189 patients from two groups, before and after implementation of the pathway, were compared. The usual care group comprised a retrospective cohort of high‐risk surgical patients between September 2015 and December 2016. The intervention group prospectively included high‐risk surgical patients from February 2019 to March 2020. Unadjusted mortality rate was 10.5% (78/746) for the usual care and 6.3% (28/443) for the intervention group. After adjustment, the intervention effect remained significant (RR 0.46 (95%CI 0.30–0.72). The high‐risk surgical bundle group received more rapid response team calls (24% vs. 12.6%; RR 0.63 [95%CI 0.49–0.80]) and surgical re‐interventions (18.9 vs. 7.5%; RR 0.41 [95%CI 0.30–0.59]). These data suggest that a clinical pathway based on enhanced surveillance for high‐risk surgical patients in a resource‐constrained setting could reduce in‐hospital mortality.