ArticleCureus2022
Management of Fungal Rhinosinusitis: Experience From a Tertiary Care Centre in North India.
Article in Cureus, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Fungal rhinosinusitis (FRS) has increased over the past few decades due to the rampant use of antibiotics, steroids, immunosuppressive drugs, increased incidence of HIV and uncontrolled diabetes. The current study reviews the types, clinical presentation, microbiology, histopathology and outcomes related to FRS in a tertiary care center in North India. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and follow-up records of patients diagnosed with FRS over three years. The data reviewed included clinical workup, ophthalmological profile, comorbidities, immunological status, radiological investigations, intraoperative and histopathological findings, treatment and follow-up records. In addition, we performed a descriptive analysis of the reviewed data. Results The study consisted of 30 FRS patients (16 male, 14 female). In that, 77% of cases were of allergic FRS, while fungal ball, chronic invasive, chronic granulomatous and acute invasive FRS represented 3%, 10%, 3% and 7% cases, respectively. The most common presentation in non-invasive forms was nasal obstruction, nasal discharge, hyposmia and polyposis, while it was facial pain and headache in the invasive varieties. After appropriate medical and surgical management through endoscopic sinus surgery, the recurrence rate in non-invasive and invasive fungal sinusitis was 16.6% and 20.8%, respectively. There was nil mortality at a minimum of one year of follow-up. Conclusion The non-invasive forms of FRS are common and have a relatively mild course. Early medical and surgical intervention and management of the underlying comorbidities are the key factors in managing invasive FRS. Close follow-up after surgery is also necessary for the timely detection and management of recurrences.
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.