Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a public health problem that has a significant socio-economic impact. Moreover, the complexity of this disease due to its heterogeneous nature based on the underlying pathophysiology - leading to different disease variants - further complicates our understanding and directions for the most appropriate targeted treatment strategies. Several International/national guidelines/position papers and/or consensus documents are available that present the current knowledge and treatment strategies for CRS. Yet there are many challenges to the management of CRS especially in the case of the more severe and refractory forms of disease. Therefore, the International Collaboration in Asthma, Allergy and Immunology (iCAALL), a collaboration between EAACI, AAAAI, ACAAI, and WAO, has decided to propose an International Consensus (ICON) on Chronic Rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this ICON on CRS is to highlight the key common messages from the existing guidelines, the differences in recommendations as well as the gaps in our current knowledge of CRS, thus providing a concise reference. In this document we discuss the definition of the disease, its relevance, pharmacoeconomics, pathophysiology, phenotypes and endotypes, genetics and risk factors, natural history and co-morbidities as well as clinical manifestations and treatment options in both adults and children comprising pharmacotherapy, surgical interventions and more recent biological approaches. Finally, we have also highlighted the unmet needs that wait to be addressed through future research.

Chronic rhinosinusitis is defined as inflammation of the mucosa of the nose and the paranasal sinuses lasting more than 12 weeks without complete resolution of symptoms. The underlying pathogenesis of this disease remains unclear. CRS carries a high burden of direct costs to public health, which includes physician visits, laboratory tests and medical imaging, hospital admissions, surgical intervention, and medical treatment. It is also associated with indirect cost, such as that of presenteeism (decreased productivity in the workplace due to work attendance while sick) and absenteeism (1-4). In the United States, the estimated healthcare expenditure associated with a diagnosis of CRS amounts to US$8.6 billion per year (5) , with US$150 million spent on antibiotics (6). CRS has a proven impact on patient quality of life, as assessed by global and disease-specific questionnaires (7-8). Quality of life evaluated by the SF-36 questionnaire has revealed that patients with chronic rhinosinusitis have more bodily pain and worse social functioning than patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes, or back pain (9). Studies designed to investigate CRS epidemiology play an important role in assessing its distribution, analyzing risk factors, and promoting public health policies. Epidemiological data on rhinosinusitis are scarce, and study methods and response rates vary widely. In a recent multicenter study performed as part of the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network project (GA 2 LEN), the prevalence rate of CRS was found to reach 10.9%

BACKGROUND: The Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) instrument is a disease-specific questionnaire for assessing the outcome of an intervention in nasal obstruction in trials. This instrument is only available in the English language and cross-culturally valid questionnaires are very important for all research, including nasal obstruction. The aim of the current study was to reproduce the cross-cultural adaptation process for the NOSE questionnaire in the Portuguese language (NOSE-p). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL: Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the instrument were divided into two stages. Stage 1 involved four bilingual professionals, an expert committee and the author of the original instrument. In Stage 2, the NOSE-p was tested on 33 patients undergoing septoplasty for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, discriminant validity, criterion validity, and response sensitivity. RESULTS: The cross-cultural adaptation process was completed and the NOSE-p was demonstrated to be a valid instrument with satisfactory construct validity. It showed an adequate internal consistency reliability and adequate test-retest reliability. It could discriminate between patients with and without nasal obstruction and it has a high response sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: The cross-cultural adaptation and validation process demonstrated to be valid and the NOSE-p proved to be applicable in Brazil.

Naasal obstruction is a common complaint in the population. When caused by a deviated nasal septum, septoplasty is the procedure of choice for treating these patients. NOSE is a tool for assessing the disease-specific quality of life related to nasal obstruction. Aim: To assess the impact of septoplasty on patients with nasal obstruction secondary to deviated nasal septum based on the disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire. Design: Prospective. Methods: Patients undergoing septoplasty with/ without turbinectomy after no clinical improvement with medical treatment were assessed by the NOSE questionnaire before and 3 months after surgery. We evaluated the surgical improvement based on total score, the magnitude of the surgery in the disease-specific quality of life and the correlation between the preoperative score and postoperatively improvement. Results: Fourty-six patients were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in the preoperative NOSE score (md = 75, IQR = 26) and after three months (md = 10, IQR = 20) (p < 0.001.T-Wilcoxon). The standardized response mean was 3.07. We found a strong correlation between the preoperative score in the NOSE questionnaire and improvements in the postoperative period (r =-0.789, p < 0.001, Spearman). No difference was found in improvement scores by gender. (p = 0.668, U-Mann-Whitney). Conclusion: Septoplasty resulted in a statistically significant improvement in the disease-specific QOL questionnaire.

Introduction. Chronic rhinosinusitis is a highly prevalent disease, so it is necessary to create valid instruments to assess the quality of life of these patients. The SNOT-20 questionnaire was developed for this purpose as a specific test to evaluate the quality of life related to chronic rhinosinusitis. It was validated in the English language, and it has been used in most studies on this subject. Currently, there is no validated instrument for assessing this disease in Portuguese. Objective. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of SNOT-20 in Portuguese. Patients and Methods. The SNOT-20 questionnaire underwent a meticulous process of cross-cultural adaptation and was evaluated by assessing its sensitivity, reliability, and validity. Results. The process resulted in an intelligible version of the questionnaire, the SNOT-20p. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.91, P < .001), reliability testing-retesting (r = 0.994, P < .001), content validity, validity of discrimination of patients without chronic rhinosinusitis (U = 44, P < .0001) and assessment of sensitivity to change (SRM = 1.53 and 1.09) were evaluated. Conclusion. We conducted a successful process of cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the SNOT-20 questionnaire into Portuguese.