ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2018
Inflammatory Biomarkers During Bacterial Acute Rhinosinusitis.
Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a Nasal Medical Device (NESOSPRAY HE-G) in Acute Rhinosinusitis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Trial
- Biomarker Analysis in Upper Respiratory Tract Infections: Associations with Demographics and Clinical Outcomes.Pediatric reports · 2024Article
- Prognosis and prediction of antibiotic benefit in adults with clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis: an individual participant data meta-analysis.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2023Article
- Turkish Guideline for Diagnosis and Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis (ART).Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewDiagnosis of bacterial acute rhinosinusitis is difficult. Several attempts have been made to clarify the diagnostic criteria. Inflammatory biomarkers are easily obtainable variables that could shed light on both the pathophysiology and diagnosis of bacterial acute rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this review article is to assess literature concerning the course of inflammatory biomarkers during acute rhinosinusitis and the use of inflammatory biomarkers in diagnosing bacterial acute rhinosinusitis. RECENT
findingsWe included C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, white blood cell counts, procalcitonin, and nasal nitric oxide in this review and found that especially elevated C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate are related to a higher probability of a bacterial cause of acute rhinosinusitis. Still, normal levels of these two biomarkers are quite common as well, or the levels can be heightened even during viral respiratory infection without suspicion of bacterial involvement. Elevated levels of C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate support diagnosis of bacterial acute rhinosinusitis, but due to a lack of sensitivity, they should not be used to screen patients for bacterial acute rhinosinusitis.
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.