Oral corticosteroids in the management of adult chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps: an evidence‐based review with recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Oral steroids are commonly used in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with and without nasal polyps (CRSwNP and CRSsNP, respectively). Past reports have included evaluation of the evidence for the use of oral steroids in CRS subtypes. However, a review with evidence‐based recommendations for all CRS subtypes has never been performed. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive, evidence‐based approach for the utilization of oral steroids in the management of CRS. A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization, and Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation. Inclusion criteria were: adult population ≥18 years old; CRS; oral steroids as the treatment group; and clearly defined primary clinical end‐point. This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Results This review identified and evaluated the literature on the use of oral steroids for CRSwNP, CRSsNP, allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), and the use of oral steroids in the perioperative period in these patients. Recommendations based on evidence, benefit/harm assessment, and value judgments are made. Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC. Conclusion Oral steroids are strongly recommended for short‐term management of CRSwNP. Oral steroids are also recommended for management of AFS. Oral steroid use in CRSsNP is optional due to insufficient strong evidence. Oral steroids are also strongly recommended in the perioperative period for CRSwNP and AFS. There is no recommendation for oral steroids use in the perioperative period in patients with CRSsNP. The risks of oral steroids are rare, but significant adverse effects must be considered. © 2012 ARS–AAOA, LLC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".