ArticleSisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni2020
Comparison of the Oral Steroids, Macrolides and Combination Therapy in Nasal Polyposis Patients.
Article in Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05157412 (Role of Doxycycline in the Management of Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps), which is not on this 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.
Role of Doxycycline in the Management of Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic Corticosteroids in the Management of Sinonasal Disease: An Evidence-Based Expert Review.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2026Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn this study, our aim was to compare oral steroid therapy with macrolide therapy and with oral steroid + macrolide (combine) therapy in patients with nasal polyposis (NP).
methodsAll patients were treated with nasal steroid therapy for eight weeks and divided randomly into three groups as follows: Oral steroid group, oral macrolide group and combine group. All patients underwent endoscopic staging, radiological grading, odour testing and completed the sino-nasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire before and after treatment.
resultsSignificant improvement was observed in all parameters after treatment in all three groups. All parameters were significantly better in the combined group than in the macrolide group. Comparison of the oral steroid group and macrolide group revealed significantly better radiological grading and odour test changes for the oral steroid group, but no statistically significant differences existed according to endoscopic staging and SNOT-22. The post-treatment SNOT-22 score was significantly better in the combined group than in the steroid group. A comparison of the combined and steroid groups showed better results for the combined group for all parameters, but the differences were not significant.
conclusionAll treatment protocols were effective and the successful use of macrolide indicates its potential as an alternative in patients with contraindications to oral steroid treatment. The combined treatment may demonstrate significantly better results than steroid treatment alone if larger studies with more patients are performed.
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.