Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The frontal recess can be a difficult area to manage postoperatively as recurrent disease and stenosis may obstruct drainage of the frontal sinus. Frontal sinus stents may be used to maintain patency temporarily. We reviewed the outcomes of frontal sinus stents left in patients for longer than 3 months to determine how long a long-term frontal stent can be left in situ. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of patients who had frontal sinus stents in situ for 3 months or longer during a 6-year span. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who had frontal stents in situ longer than 3 months from April 2000 to March 2006. Eleven charts were reviewed. RESULTS: Eleven patients had 21 frontal stents placed. Ten stents were still in situ at the end of the period studied. In the remaining 11 stents, the average duration of placement was 16.3 months. The spontaneous dislodgement rate was 14%, occurring at an average of 8.8 months. Irreversible obstruction, complication, and failure rates were 5%, 5%, and 9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this series, long-term frontal stents (defined as those left in for longer than 3 months) have been safely left in situ for an average of 16.3 months. Benefits include relative ease of placement and good patient tolerance. Disadvantages include periodic stent replacement from dislodgement or obstruction, the occasional need for suctioning to maintain patency, and the potential for stent migration into the frontal sinus. One of 11 patients had a failure of symptom control, requiring additional frontal 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".