Surgical outcomes in aspirin‐exacerbated respiratory disease without aspirin desensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) represents a severe endotype of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. Although aspirin desensitization (AD) has emerged as an effective therapeutic option, the natural history of AERD without AD remains unclear. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of AERD patients who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) without AD between 2010 and 2019. The primary outcomes were revision surgery rate and time to revision surgery. Secondary outcomes included changes in 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores (LKES). A subgroup analysis was performed for patients on monoclonal antibody therapy (MAT). RESULTS: Of 141 patients, 37 (26.2%) underwent revision ESS with a median time to revision of 3.3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2.2-4.9) years. The probability of remaining free of revision surgery at 1, 3, and 5 years was: 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.7-100.0%), 78.8% (95% CI, 70.2-88.4%), and 44.8% (95% CI, 32.4-62.1%), respectively. SNOT-22 scores decreased by 34 (IQR, 18-52) points at 6 months and 27 (IQR, 20-46) points at 1 year postoperatively. In the revision cohort, the decrease in SNOT-22 score was not sustained at 1 year postoperatively. No difference was found in time to revision compared with those without MAT (p = 0.23). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of AERD patients benefit from ESS and medical therapy alone without AD. This study presents preliminary results on the impact of MAT on surgical outcomes as it is limited by the small sample size. Further research on the use of MAT in AERD is needed.
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) | 0.000 | 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".