ArticleInternational archives of otorhinolaryngology2026
Radiological Feasibility of the Endoscopic Transnasal Prelacrimal Recess Approach.
Article in International archives of otorhinolaryngology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prelacrimal recess (PLR) distance, medial wall thickness, and the internal angle of the pyriform notch (APN) have been suggested by various studies as assessment metrics to determine the feasibility and intraoperative difficulty of the transnasal prelacrimal recess approach (TPRA), with ethnic variations. Objective: To assess the computed tomography (CT) scan feasibility of endoscopic TPRA in healthy and diseased paranasal sinuses. Methods: Our sample consisted of 750 adults (1,500 sides) who had CT of the nose and paranasal sinuses (PNS) for various indications. The CT scans were analyzed to assess variations in the distance, thickness, and angle of the prelacrimal recess on both sides concerning different demographic parameters (age and gender). All parameters were grouped into low, median, or high radiological feasibility of TPRA. Results: There was no difference in feasibility parameters between 546 healthy PNS (72.8%) and 204 chronic rhinosinusitis cases (27.2%). Only 2.7% of the maxillary sinuses studied (1,500 sides) had high radiological feasibility, 53.1% had medium radiological feasibility, and 44.2% had low radiological feasibility for TPRA. Males and individuals younger than 30 years of age had a significantly greater distance and thinner walls, making the sinus more surgically accessible ( Conclusion: The three parameters studied can be collectively applied to the preoperative assessment of patients subjected to TPRA with no effect of inflammation on accessibility parameters. Difficult accessibility can be anticipated in 42% of the population, so surgeons must have caution when practicing TPRA.
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.