ArticleThe Laryngoscope2012
Some chronic rhinosinusitis patients have elevated populations of fungi in their sinuses.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiome of the paranasal sinuses: Update and literature review.American journal of rhinology & allergyPooled it
- Immunopathologic Role of Fungi in Chronic Rhinosinusitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Association Between Microbiota and Nasal Mucosal Diseases in terms of Immunity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Pathology of Fungal Rhinosinusitis: A Review.Head and neck pathology · 2016Review
- Increased risk of open-angle glaucoma following chronic rhinosinusitis: a population-based matched-cohort study.Eye (London, England) · 2014Article
- Chronic illness associated with mold and mycotoxins: is naso-sinus fungal biofilm the culprit?Toxins · 2013Review
- Role of fungi in the pathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis: an update.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2013Review
- Rhinosinusitis: evidence and experience: October 18 and 19, 2013 - São Paulo.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives/hypothesisTo measure the populations of 36 fungi in the homes and sinuses of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and non-CRS patients. STUDY
designSingle-blind cross-sectional study.
methodsPopulations of 36 fungi were measured in sinus samples and in the home vacuum cleaner dust of CRS (n = 73) and non-CRS patients (n = 16) using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Etest strips containing amphotericin B, anidulafungin, caspofungin, fluconazole, and voriconazole were used to test the susceptibility of seven potentially relevant fungi.
resultsSeven fungi (Alternaria alternata, Cladosporium cladosporioides types 1 and 2, Cladosporium herbarum, Penicillium brevicompactum, Penicillium crustosum, and Penicillium chrysogenum type 2) were discovered at very high concentrations in some CRS patients. In vitro antifungal susceptibility testing of these seven fungi demonstrated species specific sensitivities. Four CRS patients with marked elevations of fungal populations in their sinus samples underwent endoscopic sinus surgery. After surgical treatment, the fungal populations were reduced by several orders of magnitude.
conclusionsSeven fungi were found in very high concentrations in the sinuses of some CRS patients. Not one of the five common antifungal agents could control all seven of these fungi based on in vitro tests.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.