Management of early nasal polyposis using a steroid‐impregnated nasal dressing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral corticosteroids are the mainstay of medical management of sinonasal polyposis. However, systemic steroid-related side effects can be significant in both the short-term and long-term. Topical targeted steroids in optimal concentrations to the affected mucosa present an attractive alternative. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of steroid impregnated absorbable nasal dressing with oral steroids in the management of early nasal polyposis after endoscopic sinus surgery. METHODS: A total of 21 symptomatic patients with nasal polyposis presenting with endoscopic findings of early polyposis received triamcinolone-impregnated (20 mg/mL) nasal dressing (Nasopore; Stryker Canada). A control group of 20 similar patients were treated with a short course of oral steroids. Evaluation was based on Sinonasal Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ-11) and Perioperative Sinus Endoscopy (POSE) score at baseline, 4-week, and 8-week follow-up intervals. RESULTS: At baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks mean SNAQ scores were 18.42, 8.76, and 9.42 in the study group and 19.35, 7.15, and 7.60 in the control group, respectively. Mean POSE scores were 12.14, 5.04, and 6.04 in the study group and 13.52, 5.01, and 5.52 in the control group, respectively. No significant difference was found between the groups at 4 and 8 weeks in either SNAQ (p = 0.129, p = 0.235) or POSE (p = 0.803, p = 0.795) scores. CONCLUSION: Triamcinolone-impregnated absorbable nasal dressing is comparable to oral steroids in the management of early nasal polyposis after sinus surgery.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".