MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2935257409 · doi:10.1097/iop.0000000000001357

Invasive Fungal Sinusitis: Risk Factors for Visual Acuity Outcomes and Mortality

2019· article· en· W2935257409 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin E. Hirabayashi, Oluwatobi O. Idowu, Evan Kalin-Hajdu, Catherine E. Oldenburg, Frank Brodie, Robert C. Kersten, M. Reza Vagefi

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsMedicineVisual acuitySinusitisSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyConfidence intervalFungal sinusitisMedical recordMalignancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Invasive fungal sinusitis is a rare but potentially lethal disease that primarily affects immunocompromised patients. The purpose of this study was to review an academic medical center's experience in the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of invasive fungal sinusitis. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed at a single institution over a 17-year period. Medical records, radiographic imaging, and operative reports were analyzed. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine factors that affected visual acuity outcomes and mortality. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients with histopathologically confirmed invasive fungal sinusitis were included. The average duration of follow up was 1.8 ± 2.6 years (range: 1 week to 10 years). The most common causes of immunosuppression were hematologic malignancy (45%), diabetes (31%), and organ transplantation (9%). At presentation, 35% of individuals were neutropenic (absolute neutrophil count < 500/μl). All patients received systemic antifungal treatment. A surgical intervention was performed on 50 patients (91%), and all but one had functional endoscopic sinus surgery. Nine (16%) patients underwent orbital exenteration. Multivariable analysis of visual acuity outcomes demonstrated that individuals infected with Zygomycota had 6-7 lines worse vision than those infected with Ascomycota (mean difference in logMAR 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 1.06, p = 0.001). Patients who had functional endoscopic sinus surgery had 7-8 lines better visual acuity than those without functional endoscopic sinus surgery (mean difference in logMAR -0.76, 95% confidence interval -1.13 to -0.38, p < 0.001). The overall death rate due to infection was 24%. Bivariate models demonstrated no difference in mortality in patients receiving exenteration versus those who did not (p = 0.14). Multivariable analysis of mortality demonstrated that neutropenia increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio 10.05, 95% confidence interval 1.49 to 67.67, p = 0.02). Having a greater number of surgeries was associated with an increased rate of survival (adjusted odds ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.96, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Invasive fungal sinusitis is an aggressive disease with significant mortality. Patients with neutropenia had a lower rate of survival, and infection with Zygomycota was associated with worse visual acuity outcomes. Those having functional endoscopic sinus surgery had better final visual acuity, and an increased number of surgeries was associated with a decreased chance of death. Exenteration yielded no observed survival benefit.Endoscopic sinus debridement portends better visual acuity outcomes in patients with invasive fungal sinusitis, whereas exenteration yields no difference in survival benefit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive SurgerySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207