The author's disclosures are as follows: Batra: research grant (Xoran, MedInvent), consultant (Medtronic, LifeCell, NeilMed), speaker's bureau (Storz); Marple: consultant (Teva, Alcon); Ryan: speaker's bureau (Merck); Sindwani: consultant (Brainlab, Medafor). The authors have no other funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.
Balloon catheter technology in rhinology: Reviewing the Evidence†
Article first published online: 7 SEP 2010
Copyright © 2010 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.
Volume 121, Issue 1, pages 226–232, January 2011
How to Cite
Batra, P. S., Ryan, M. W., Sindwani, R. and Marple, B. F. (2011), Balloon catheter technology in rhinology: Reviewing the Evidence. The Laryngoscope, 121: 226–232. doi: 10.1002/lary.21114
- Issue published online: 22 DEC 2010
- Article first published online: 7 SEP 2010
- Manuscript Accepted: 16 JUN 2010
- Chronic rhinosinusitis;
- frontal sinusitis;
- balloon catheter;
- balloon dilatation;
- sinus ostia dilatation
Balloon catheter technology (BCT) for management of paranasal sinus inflammatory disease was introduced to otolaryngology in 2005. Since its introduction, BCT has been a subject of considerable controversy with proponents for and against adoption of the technology. Balloon procedures have been promoted as a less invasive alternative to endoscopic sinus surgery that results in reduced pain and quicker recovery. The technology and its promotion have generated significant press coverage and interest by the lay public looking for new solutions for sinonasal problems. Over time, alternate balloon devices have been advocated for operating room and office-based sinus ostia dilatation. This contemporary review will evaluate the existing evidence on the available balloon devices. The frank strengths and weaknesses of the peer-reviewed literature will be highlighted. The potential complications unique to balloon catheters and radiation exposure from fluoroscopy will also be discussed. Laryngoscope, 2011