ArticleClinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology2018
Bacterial Ball as an Unusual Finding in Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis.
Article in Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacteria-ball in the urinary tract: a rare entity.BJR case reports · 2020Article
- Unveiling the Diverse Spectrum of Fungal Rhinosinusitis.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2020Article
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
objectivesPathophysiology of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is very complex and has not yet been clearly understood. To date, various factors have been researched to have relations with the pathogenesis of CRS, such as superantigens and biofilms. Recently, we found an unusual pathological finding in patients with CRS, and we called this new entity as bacteria ball (or bioball). In this study, we analyze the clinical characteristics of bacteria ball occurred in CRS.
methodsThis study enrolled consecutive 247 patients with CRS who underwent functional endoscopic sinus surgery from January 2015 to August 2016. The diagnosis of bacterial ball was made when negative in Gomori-methenamine-silver stain and positive in Gram stain. Histologically, bacterial ball was defined as acellular mucous materials with bacterial colonies and inflammatory cell infiltrates. We compared clinical data and computed tomography (CT) findings between fungal and bacterial balls.
resultsSix cases (2.4%) of CRS were confirmed histologically as bacterial ball. Most of them were found in the maxillary sinus of CRS without nasal polyposis (66.7%). Bacterial ball was green or brown colored materials similar to fungal ball which was harder and tightly adherent to the antral mucosa. Compared to fungal ball, patients with bacterial ball showed significantly less peripheral eosinophils (
conclusionBacterial ball is unusual findings occurred in patient with CRS which is different from fungal ball and biofilm. For diagnosis of bacterial ball, Gram stain is essentially required to identify bacterial colonies. Bacterial ball might appear to be evidence of a new strategy for living in the paranasal sinuses.
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.