We are pleased that the EUFOREA Expert Panel has shared their opinion, as a multispecialty approach to allergic rhinitis (AR) is necessary to expand the options available to patients. 1 Although inferior turbinate reduction (ITR) has traditionally been viewed as a procedure strictly targeting nasal obstruction, there is an evolving understanding that modern techniques can provide additional benefits with a low rate of complications. ITR for the treatment of AR has now been shown to significantly improve sneezing and rhinorrhea which is sustained beyond 1 year after surgery. 2 Additionally, the role of the inferior turbinate in nonallergic rhinitis is being increasingly recognized. Submucous resection may have a beneficial effect through the disruption of overactive parasympathetic neurovascular supply in the inferior turbinate. 3 Furthermore, ITR techniques have evolved over time and no longer involve radical mucosal resection, but rather mucosalsparing techniques such as controlled ablation or removal of the submucous tissues. These approaches preserve the function but dampen the reactivity of the turbinate. 4,5 Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) remains an important treatment for patients as it can modify the underlying immune response. However, consideration of ITR as an upfront or concurrent treatment would only serve to expand available options for patients, as ITR would not preclude allergy testing and AIT. ITR may offer a more immediate effect when compared to the time it typically takes to perform allergen testing and reach AIT maintenance dosing. 6 Furthermore, ITR may be beneficial to patients who are not candidates for AIT. In addition, although there has been some exploration of the link between untreated AR and the development of asthma, there has not been a causative link identified. 7,8 It could be postulated that because the inferior turbinate itself plays a major role as the first anatomic structure which samples inspired air, dampening of its reactivity by way of ITR may alter the progression of AR and, by extension, asthma. However, this discussion remains speculative.Lastly, we believe that the results of the analysis reflect a real-world approach to clinical decision-making. Testing such as acoustic rhinometry is rarely if at all performed in the clinical setting and does not affect the decision to proceed with ITR. 9 Additionally, although societal factors such as losses of productivity were not captured in the analysis, these factors would be applicable to both ITR and AIT, as the societal costs of referral delays, AIT rampup period, and nonresponse would be nontrivial.