Effect of Endoscopic Sinus Surgery on Clinical Outcomes in Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is prevalent in the Cystic Fibrosis (CF) population. CRS exacerbations in CF are thought to contribute to pulmonary exacerbations. Literature regarding the impact of endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is inconclusive. This study examines rates of lung function decline and pulmonary exacerbation in CF patients who have undergone ESS. Design: Retrospective review of medical records. Setting: Academic Hospital. Participants: 40 adult CF patients. Main outcome measures: Rate of lung function decline (Forced Expiratory Volume1(FEV1) % predicted), number of pulmonary exacerbations (IV/oral antibiotic therapy +/- hospital admission) and total number days hospitalized 2 years post-operatively was collected. CRS patients undergoing ESS were matched to those without ESS by gender, age, and F508del genotype. Results: Forty patients (mean age 37.4, 60% male) were reviewed. No significant difference was found between the surgical group and controls in baseline FEV1(72.5% vs. 72.7%, p=0.98), 2-year pre-operative number of pulmonary exacerbations (3.05 vs. 1.65, p=0.10), or Lund-Mackay scores (12.25 vs. 11.55, p=0.71). No significant difference was found in 1-year (70.5% vs. 72.8%, p=0.84) or 2-year (70.4% vs. 72.6% p=0.80) post-operative FEV1 and 2-year post-operative pulmonary exacerbations (1.7 vs. 1.45, p=0.87). A significant increase was identified in total number days hospitalized post-operatively (4.85, p=0.02). In the surgical group, no significant difference was identified between preoperative and postoperative FEV1, 1 -year (-2.51%, p=0.32) and 2-years after ESS (-3.10%, p=0.51), postoperative rate of pulmonary exacerbations (-1.28, p=0.11), or in total number days hospitalized (3.74, p=0.14). Conclusions: In this study, ESS does not appear to significantly improve FEV1 or decrease the number of pulmonary exacerbations post-operatively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".