ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Tomographic assessment of anatomical boundaries in endoscopic frontal sinusotomy: retrospective radiologic analysis of Draf IIA and IIB approaches.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the anatomical dimensions and boundaries involved in Draf IIA (DIIA) and Draf IIB (DIIB) frontal sinusotomies, and to determine how complete frontal beak removal affects the frontal sinus drainage pathway. Specifically, we compared the proportional increase in drainage area between DIIA and DIIB performed with and without complete frontal beak removal.
methodsThis retrospective radiological anatomical study analyzed 296 hemifaces (from 148 patients) who underwent paranasal sinus Computed Tomography (CT). Individuals over 18-years of age without evidence of paranasal sinus disease were included. We measured the anatomical distances defining the frontal recess and estimated the differences in frontal recess area for three approaches: Draf type IIA (DIIA), Draf type IIB without complete removal of the frontal beak (DIIBwoFB), and Draf type IIB with complete removal of the frontal beak (DIIB).
resultsThe measured areas of the frontal ostium were as follows: 59.00 ± 24.34 mm
conclusionAmong the evaluated surgical approaches, the greatest proportional increase in anatomical drainage area was achieved with Draf IIB combined with complete frontal beak removal. These findings underscore the importance of frontal beak resection when considering the Draf IIB approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.