ArticleActa otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale2024
Recurrent respiratory papillomatosis: comparing in-office and operating room treatments.
Article in Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary management of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis: a survey of Australian otolaryngologists.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Laryngeal Papillomatosis.Cancers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We report the management of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP) employing a protocol that includes both office-based (OB) and general anaesthesia (GA) procedures. Quality of life (QoL) outcomes in the OB cohort were compared to those obtained from an historical cohort treated only under GA. Methods: Patients affected by RRP from 2019 until 2023 ("new protocol") and from 2012 to 2019 ("historical protocol") were enrolled. In both groups the Derkay site score (DSS) was calculated. In patients adhering to the new protocol, questionnaires measuring QoL were prospectively administered (voice handicap hindex-10 [VHI-10] along with a specific questionnaire to measure the tolerance to the OB procedures). A cost analysis was also performed. Results: In all, 35 patients composed the new protocol cohort and 13 the historical. In the first group, patients underwent a median of 4 treatments. At 2 years, 68% of patients were treated exclusively in the office. Overall, for the new protocol, median DSS and VHI-10 after one year were both significantly lower than those at baseline [2 Conclusions: Treatment of RRP may be conducted successfully in an office-based setting reducing healthcare costs.
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.