SynthesisThe Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology2023
Balloon Sinus Dilation Versus Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Comparison of Long-Term Revision Rates and Health Care Utilization Between Standalone Balloon Sinus Dilation and Endoscopic Sinus Surgery in Chronic Rhinosinusitis Patients Without Nasal Polyps: Is the Balloon Value Proposition Overinflated?American journal of rhinology & allergy · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the efficacy of balloon sinus dilation (BSD) compared to functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) or medical management for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).
methodsA qualified medical librarian conducted a literature search for relevant publications that evaluate efficacy of BSD. Studies were assessed independently by 2 reviewers for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis.
resultsFrom 315 abstracts reviewed, 18 studies were included in qualitative review, and 7 were included in meta-analysis. Quantitative analysis included 4 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 3 cohort studies comparing baseline and post-operative Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT)-20 scores in BSD and FESS. A meta-analysis restricted to the studies reporting SD for changes from baseline (2 RCTs, 1 cohort) showed the pooled difference in means to be 0.435, less than a clinically meaningful difference of 0.8. A separate sensitivity analysis of the studies including 4 additional studies with imputed values of SD for changes from baseline showed the pooled difference of means to be 0.237 assuming the highest level of correlation (
conclusionsThere is limited high-quality evidence that assesses the efficacy of BSD versus FESS in the management of CRS patients. To better inform CRS management, future studies should compare BSD with endoscopic sinus surgery, hybrid procedures, and/or medical management alone using validated objective and patient-reported outcome measures.
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.