ReviewLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
The Clinical Outcome of Image-Guided System in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Although image-guided system (IGS) is considered useful in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), its impact on clinical outcomes needs further evaluation. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) undergoing ESS with or without IGS. Data Sources: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP to identify comparative clinical studies on clinical outcomes of ESS with or without IGS. Methods: The primary outcome were total complications. Secondary outcomes were recurrence, revision surgery, blood loss, surgical time, and patient-reported outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Results: A total of 16 studies were included with a total sample size of 3014 patients. Compared with non-IGS, total complications were less common in IGS group (OR = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.74, Conclusion: Compared with non-IGS, IGS-assisted ESS was associated with a lower risk of total complications, recurrence, and revision surgery, and with a reduction of intraoperative blood loss and surgical time. These findings support the clinical use of IGS as an adjunct in ESS for CRS patients. Level of Evidence: 3.
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.