Effectiveness of dupilumab versus endoscopic sinus surgery for the treatment of type-2 chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a preliminary report

Purpose Historically managed with intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), type-2 Chronic RhinoSinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) treatment was revolutionized by the introduction of dupilumab but universally accepted guidelines are still lacking. Methods Patients treated at our University Hospital for type-2 CRSwNP were enrolled. Demographic data were collected, as well as laboratory (eosinophils, total IgE), endoscopic [nasal polyps score (NPS), modified Lund–Kennedy score (mLKS)], radiological [Lund–Mackay score (LMS) at CT scan], SNOT-22, and olfactory [Sniffin’ Sticks identification test (SSIT)] features. Patients were treated with dupilumab or ESS and re-evaluated after 3 and 12 months. Results At 3 and 12 months, patients undergoing ESS achieved a higher reduction of NPS and mLKS, while patients receiving dupilumab experienced a higher improvement at SNOT-22 and SSIT with a greater positive variation in the prevalence of anosmia (− 57.7% vs − 42.9%) and normosmia (+ 37.8 vs + 28.5%). Mean mLKS and LMS were quite similar. Results were independent of clinical features known to contribute to CRSwNP severity, except for patients with ≥ 2 prior ESS who had a significantly lower smell improvement. Conclusion ESS and dupilumab were effective at reducing CRSwNP inflammatory burning. CRSwNP smell impairment cannot be attributed only to olfactory cleft obstruction and other mechanisms may be involved. Dupilumab acts systemically with poor correlation with NPS. As of today, dupilumab appears to be more suitable for elderly patients with anesthesiological contraindications and/or several previous surgeries, while ESS may represent the first-line choice in surgery-naive patients.