ArticleScience progress
Otitis media with effusion in adults during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.
Article in Science progress. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical manifestations and outcomes of otitis media with effusion in adult patients following Omicron infection in China.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to investigate the fluctuations in the prevalence of individuals diagnosed with otitis media with effusion (OME) during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, while also evaluating the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in middle ear effusion (MEE) and assessing the effectiveness of tympanocentesis as a treatment modality for OME in this specific period.
methodsThe total number of outpatients and patients diagnosed with OME in our department was recorded for January 2022 and January 2023. Thirty patients (aged 15-86 years) were categorized into two groups: group A (n = 12), who developed OME during their SARS-CoV-2 infection and group B (n = 18), who experienced OME after the resolution of SARS-CoV-2 infection. All patients underwent otoendoscopic tympanocentesis (without a ventilation tube), where MEE and nasopharyngeal secretions were simultaneously collected for SARS-CoV-2 detection by polymerase chain reaction. The time interval from SARS-CoV-2 infection to tympanocentesis, results of SARS-CoV-2 detection, preoperative and postoperative average hearing threshold, and Eustachian Tube Dysfunction Questionnaire (ETDQ-7) scores were documented.
resultsThe proportion of outpatients with OME in January 2023 was higher than that in January 2022. There were five patients who had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 on MEE after tympanocentesis. These 5 patients underwent tympanocentesis at a mean of 28 ± 7.28 days following confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The ETDQ-7 scores of group A exhibited a reduction from 21.85 ± 4.8 to 10.00 ± 4.07 following tympanocentesis, while the ETDQ-7 scores of group B also demonstrated a decrease from 21.22 ± 4.65 to 10.11 ± 3.68 after undergoing tympanocentesis. The tympanocentesis was effective in both groups.
conclusionsThe study confirmed that the proportion of outpatients with OME in the Clinics of Otolaryngology during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic increased significantly. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in MEE of COVID-19-related OME patients. Tympanocentesis was therapeutic for OME during SARS-CoV-2 infection, which facilitated viral clearance in MEE.
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.