ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Endoscopic visualization of CT-confirmed accessory maxillary ostium: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The accessory maxillary ostium (AMO) is a common anatomical variant of the lateral nasal wall and has been implicated in impaired maxillary sinus drainage, mucus recirculation, and chronic sinus pathology. Although AMO can be identified using both radiologic and endoscopic techniques, the endoscopic visualization rate of CT-documented AMO has not been well characterized. This study aimed to evaluate the endoscopic visualization rate of AMO using FFE in patients with CT-documented AMO. Method: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary referral center between January 2023 and December 2024. Patients with CT-confirmed AMO who subsequently underwent FFE were included. Patients with a history of prior sinus surgery were excluded. Demographic data, CT findings, and endoscopic visualization of AMO were collected from electronic medical records. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate. Results: A total of 274 patients were included, with a mean age of 34.4 ± 14.1 years; 51.8% were male. While AMO was confirmed on CT imaging in all participants by inclusion criteria, FFE visualized AMO in only 26% of cases (71/274), indicating a low endoscopic visualization rate among patients with CT-confirmed AMO. Maxillary sinus opacification was detected on CT in 49.6% of patients, while nasal polyps were present in 34.3%. No significant gender differences were observed in the prevalence of maxillary opacification or nasal polyps. Conclusion: Flexible fiberoptic endoscopy demonstrated limited ability to visualize accessory maxillary ostium in patients with CT-documented AMO. While FFE remains useful for functional and mucosal assessment, CT imaging appeared to useful for anatomical identification of AMO and may be considered for comprehensive evaluation and surgical planning.
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.