Trial reportHNO2013
[Treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis using balloon sinuplasty. A quality of life analysis].
Trial report in HNO, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comprehensive review on endonasal endoscopic sinus surgery.GMS current topics in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBalloon sinuplasty (functional endoscopic dilation surgery, FEDS) has become established as a safe therapeutic procedure for treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Our goal was to assess the effect on quality of life (QoL) using validated tools and identify predictive factors. MATERIALS AND
methodsA consecutive cohort of 14 patients was evaluated using the disease-specific QoL questionnaire Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 20 (SNOT-20). The measured postoperative changes were then correlated to the results of preoperative CT scan analyses performed according to Lund.
resultsBoth the overall SNOT-20 scores and those corresponding to subsections regarding primary nasal symptoms (PNS) and secondary rhinogenic symptoms (SRS) showed a highly significant improvement (p < 0.01). Changes in PNS but not in SRS correlated with the CT scan analyses (p < 0.05). Eighty five percent of patients said that they would choose to undergo FEDS again.
conclusionsFEDS is an effective technique that can alleviate symptoms and improve QoL. Patient selection should not be based on CT data alone but a CT scan can be used to determine whether or not the FEDS technique is applicable to the individual patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23463413What 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.