Azithromycin Add-On Therapy in High-Risk Postendoscopic Sinus Surgery Patients Failing Corticosteroid Irrigations: A Clinical Practice Audit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has a high potential for recurrence after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), despite a postoperative therapy of topical corticosteroid irrigations. Azithromycin (AZI) is a macrolide antibiotic with anti-inflammatory properties that may be of benefit in such steroid-unresponsive patients. Follow-up study was performed to (1) review the effectiveness of the management strategy of adding AZI in high-risk post-ESS patients failing standard management and (2) identify predictive factors for steroid nonresponsiveness. METHODS: A retrospective audit of the postoperative evolution of all patients undergoing ESS for CRS in 2010 by a single surgeon was undertaken. Patients deemed at high risk of recurrence based on preoperative history and/or perioperative findings received nasal irrigation with 0.5 mg of budesonide (BUD) in 240 mL of saline twice daily after ESS. Patients showing signs of endoscopic recurrence at 4 months, despite BUD, had AZI at 250 mg three times a week added to their treatment regimen. RESULTS: A total of 57 high-risk patients underwent ESS during this period. At 4 months, 63.2% (36/57) had a favorable outcome solely with BUD. Twelve of the 21 nonresponders received AZI, with an additional 66.7% (8/12) subsequently showing a favorable response. Failure of BUD was associated with female gender (p = 0.048), having elevated alpha-1-antitrypsin levels (p = 0.037) and lower recovery rates of Staphylococcus aureus (p = 0.063). Although the AZI subgroup was too small for statistical analysis, female gender was more frequently associated with failure of both BUD and AZI, while IgE was not useful. CONCLUSION: A significant subgroup of high-risk patients showing disease recurrence after ESS despite topical corticosteroid therapy may respond to the addition of AZI as part of their therapy. These findings suggest that topical steroid-unresponsive CRS may represent a distinct entity and that alternate anti-inflammatory agents may be required for optimal management.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".