Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous disease with distinct inflammatory endotypes, among which eosinophilic CRS (ECRS)—a category that substantially overlaps with, but is not equivalent to, Type 2 CRS—is associated with severe symptoms, frequent recurrence, and comorbid asthma. Accurate identification of Type 2 CRS has become clinically essential with the emergence of biologic therapies that target Type 2 inflammatory pathways. However, most diagnostic criteria, including those proposed by European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 (EPOS 2020), were developed from Western populations, in which ECRS with nasal polyps predominates. This review critically examines the applicability of these criteria in Asian populations, in which non-eosinophilic and mixed inflammatory endotypes remain prevalent. Evidence from Korean and Japanese cohorts indicates that the EPOS 2020 Type 2 criteria have poor specificity in Asian patients with CRS with nasal polyps, classifying nearly all such patients as Type 2 because of differences in baseline biomarker distributions. We discuss histological thresholds for defining ECRS and highlight that Asian studies support higher tissue eosinophil cut-offs, approximately 70 eosinophils per high-power field (HPF) or around 10% of total inflammatory cells, compared with the 10 eosinophils per HPF recommended by Western guidelines. This review also evaluates outpatient- friendly scoring systems, such as Japanese Epidemiological Survey of Refractory Eosinophilic Chronic Rhinosinusitis (JESREC) and newly proposed Korean diagnostic criteria, as well as emerging machine-learning approaches for noninvasive prediction of ECRS. We conclude that clinicians in Asia should adopt regionally validated criteria that integrate histological, serological, and clinical parameters to accurately identify Type 2 CRS, optimize selection of biologic candidates, and improve prognostic counseling in this population.

Background and Objectives: Pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) significantly affects children’s quality of life and learning abilities. This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients who underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for CRS. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on pediatric patients who underwent FESS for CRS at 11 university hospitals. The inclusion criteria were patients under 20 years old with bilateral disease who were operated on between January 2005 and December 2021. The data collected included demographics, clinical history, blood tests, preoperative computed tomography, and preoperative and postoperative symptom control. The Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact tests were used to compare the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Results: In total, 213 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 13.4±3.0 years, and 145 (68.1%) were male. One hundred sixty-four patients (77.0%) had nasal polyps and 33 patients (15.5%) underwent revision FESS. The preoperative symptoms, in order of prevalence, included nasal obstruction (87.8%), rhinorrhea (71.8%), a sense of postnasal drip (58.2%), hyposmia (44.6%), cough (24.4%), and facial fullness (18.3%). These symptoms were significantly alleviated for up to 3 years after surgery (p<0.001). At the time of the last follow-up, 121 patients (56.8%) were controlled, 80 (37.6%) were partly controlled, and 12 (5.6%) were uncontrolled. Patients in the uncontrolled group had higher Lund-Mackay scores, longer follow-up durations, and more instances of revision surgery compared to those in the controlled and partly controlled groups. When age was categorized into three groups, those aged 16 years or older tended to have lower Lund-Mackay scores and better control. Conclusion FESS significantly improves both the postoperative symptoms and the long-term quality of life in pediatric CRS patients. Better symptom control is associated with older age and a lower disease burden.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a prevalent condition that significantly impacts quality of life and places a burden on healthcare systems. The advent of biologics targeting type 2 immune pathways offers new therapeutic options for severe and/or uncontrolled CRSwNP. Initially, biologic use was guided by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) 2020 and the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) guidelines, despite limited data on clinical indications, response measures, and treatment duration. Since then, numerous studies and the EPOS/EUFOREA 2023 update have refined these guidelines. The update defines clinical indications for biologics based on type 2 inflammation markers by lowering the blood eosinophil threshold from 250 to 150 cells/μL. The response to biologics is now more simply categorized into three levels based on reductions in nasal polyp size, improvements in quality of life, and enhancement of smell. Treatment evaluation is recommended at 6 months with annual follow-up. Longer administration intervals, such as every four weeks, have also proven effective in well-controlled patients. Although specific guidelines for discontinuation or switching biologics remain lacking, clinical judgment is essential in determining when treatment should be stopped or adjusted. Additionally, regulatory updates support the use of biologics for CRSwNP, and novel agents such as tezepelumab (an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin monoclonal antibody) continue to show promise. Finally, in Korea, biologics for CRSwNP are not covered by national health insurance, leading to extended dosing intervals due to high costs. Despite this limitation, studies have shown that adjusted dosing can maintain subjective quality of life. Recent studies by Korean authors have also explored practical considerations such as dosing intervals and comparisons to surgery. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness and prospective studies tailored to the Korean healthcare system.

Background and Objectives: Pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) significantly affects children’s quality of life and learning abilities. This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients who underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for CRS. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on pediatric patients who underwent FESS for CRS at 11 university hospitals. The inclusion criteria were patients under 20 years old with bilateral disease who were operated on between January 2005 and December 2021. The data collected included demographics, clinical history, blood tests, preoperative computed tomography, and preoperative and postoperative symptom control. The Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact tests were used to compare the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Results: In total, 213 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 13.4±3.0 years, and 145 (68.1%) were male. One hundred sixty-four patients (77.0%) had nasal polyps and 33 patients (15.5%) underwent revision FESS. The preoperative symptoms, in order of prevalence, included nasal obstruction (87.8%), rhinorrhea (71.8%), a sense of postnasal drip (58.2%), hyposmia (44.6%), cough (24.4%), and facial fullness (18.3%). These symptoms were significantly alleviated for up to 3 years after surgery (p<0.001). At the time of the last follow-up, 121 patients (56.8%) were controlled, 80 (37.6%) were partly controlled, and 12 (5.6%) were uncontrolled. Patients in the uncontrolled group had higher Lund-Mackay scores, longer follow-up durations, and more instances of revision surgery compared to those in the controlled and partly controlled groups. When age was categorized into three groups, those aged 16 years or older tended to have lower Lund-Mackay scores and better control. Conclusion FESS significantly improves both the postoperative symptoms and the long-term quality of life in pediatric CRS patients. Better symptom control is associated with older age and a lower disease burden.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a prevalent condition that significantly impacts quality of life and places a burden on healthcare systems. The advent of biologics targeting type 2 immune pathways offers new therapeutic options for severe and/or uncontrolled CRSwNP. Initially, biologic use was guided by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) 2020 and the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) guidelines, despite limited data on clinical indications, response measures, and treatment duration. Since then, numerous studies and the EPOS/EUFOREA 2023 update have refined these guidelines. The update defines clinical indications for biologics based on type 2 inflammation markers by lowering the blood eosinophil threshold from 250 to 150 cells/μL. The response to biologics is now more simply categorized into three levels based on reductions in nasal polyp size, improvements in quality of life, and enhancement of smell. Treatment evaluation is recommended at 6 months with annual follow-up. Longer administration intervals, such as every four weeks, have also proven effective in well-controlled patients. Although specific guidelines for discontinuation or switching biologics remain lacking, clinical judgment is essential in determining when treatment should be stopped or adjusted. Additionally, regulatory updates support the use of biologics for CRSwNP, and novel agents such as tezepelumab (an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin monoclonal antibody) continue to show promise. Finally, in Korea, biologics for CRSwNP are not covered by national health insurance, leading to extended dosing intervals due to high costs. Despite this limitation, studies have shown that adjusted dosing can maintain subjective quality of life. Recent studies by Korean authors have also explored practical considerations such as dosing intervals and comparisons to surgery. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness and prospective studies tailored to the Korean healthcare system.

Background and Objectives: Pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) significantly affects children’s quality of life and learning abilities. This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes in pediatric patients who underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for CRS. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on pediatric patients who underwent FESS for CRS at 11 university hospitals. The inclusion criteria were patients under 20 years old with bilateral disease who were operated on between January 2005 and December 2021. The data collected included demographics, clinical history, blood tests, preoperative computed tomography, and preoperative and postoperative symptom control. The Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact tests were used to compare the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Results: In total, 213 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 13.4±3.0 years, and 145 (68.1%) were male. One hundred sixty-four patients (77.0%) had nasal polyps and 33 patients (15.5%) underwent revision FESS. The preoperative symptoms, in order of prevalence, included nasal obstruction (87.8%), rhinorrhea (71.8%), a sense of postnasal drip (58.2%), hyposmia (44.6%), cough (24.4%), and facial fullness (18.3%). These symptoms were significantly alleviated for up to 3 years after surgery (p<0.001). At the time of the last follow-up, 121 patients (56.8%) were controlled, 80 (37.6%) were partly controlled, and 12 (5.6%) were uncontrolled. Patients in the uncontrolled group had higher Lund-Mackay scores, longer follow-up durations, and more instances of revision surgery compared to those in the controlled and partly controlled groups. When age was categorized into three groups, those aged 16 years or older tended to have lower Lund-Mackay scores and better control. Conclusion FESS significantly improves both the postoperative symptoms and the long-term quality of life in pediatric CRS patients. Better symptom control is associated with older age and a lower disease burden.

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a prevalent condition that significantly impacts quality of life and places a burden on healthcare systems. The advent of biologics targeting type 2 immune pathways offers new therapeutic options for severe and/or uncontrolled CRSwNP. Initially, biologic use was guided by the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) 2020 and the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) guidelines, despite limited data on clinical indications, response measures, and treatment duration. Since then, numerous studies and the EPOS/EUFOREA 2023 update have refined these guidelines. The update defines clinical indications for biologics based on type 2 inflammation markers by lowering the blood eosinophil threshold from 250 to 150 cells/μL. The response to biologics is now more simply categorized into three levels based on reductions in nasal polyp size, improvements in quality of life, and enhancement of smell. Treatment evaluation is recommended at 6 months with annual follow-up. Longer administration intervals, such as every four weeks, have also proven effective in well-controlled patients. Although specific guidelines for discontinuation or switching biologics remain lacking, clinical judgment is essential in determining when treatment should be stopped or adjusted. Additionally, regulatory updates support the use of biologics for CRSwNP, and novel agents such as tezepelumab (an anti-thymic stromal lymphopoietin monoclonal antibody) continue to show promise. Finally, in Korea, biologics for CRSwNP are not covered by national health insurance, leading to extended dosing intervals due to high costs. Despite this limitation, studies have shown that adjusted dosing can maintain subjective quality of life. Recent studies by Korean authors have also explored practical considerations such as dosing intervals and comparisons to surgery. Further research is needed to optimize treatment strategies, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness and prospective studies tailored to the Korean healthcare system.

Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.

Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.

Background and Objectives: The medications preferred by patients for allergic rhinitis and their usage remain unclear. This study investigated treatment-seeking behaviors in patients with allergic rhinitis, including medical treatments, environmental controls, and surgical treatments. Methods: In this study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted by internal medicine, pediatric, or otorhinolaryngology physicians at university hospitals from January 2022 to April 2022. A questionnaire was administered to patients with confirmed allergic rhinitis to collect information regarding medical treatments (prescription and over-the-counter medication use patterns, comorbid asthma, and allergen-specific immunotherapy), environmental controls (usage of air purifiers and pet avoidance), and experiences with surgical treatments. Results: We included 51 patients with allergic rhinitis with a mean age of 31.6±16.0 years. Among them, 47 (92.2%) and 6 (11.8%) patients had pollen allergies and asthma, respectively. Furthermore, 41 (80.4%) patients took prescribed medicines, while 39 (76.5%) patients only used the medication when experiencing symptoms. Thirty patients (58.8%) reported concurrent use of intranasal sprays and oral medications. Thirty-three patients (64.7%) reported awareness of immunotherapy, and there were no preferential differences between subcutaneous (52%) and sublingual immunotherapy (48%). Of the 36 patients (70.6%) who reported using an air purifier, 38.9% considered it helpful in preventing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Fourteen patients (27.5%) currently or previously had a companion animal, with half experiencing worsening of symptoms. Twelve patients had received surgical treatment and reported high satisfaction levels (41.6%, very satisfied; 41.6%, satisfied). Conclusion Patients with allergic rhinitis showed similar preferences for oral and spray medications. They also showed satisfaction with surgical treatments and an interest in the environmental management of allergic rhinitis.