Association Between Chronic Rhinosinusitis and Reflux Diseases in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Over the last few decades, reflux diseases, such as laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), have been identified as significant contributors to inflammatory upper aerodigestive tract diseases. Establishing a direct relationship between reflux disease and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is challenging due to the high prevalence of both diseases and their potential for independent coexistence. Objective The purpose of this study is to review the existing literature and evaluate the evidence of an association between reflux diseases and CRS. Methods A comprehensive electronic search was conducted across multiple databases to identify all studies that investigated the relationship between LPR, GERD, and CRS from January 1, 1950, to June 16, 2022. Only studies with English manuscripts involving adult populations were included, while case series, case reports, and in vitro studies were excluded. The risk of bias was evaluated using The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies and the NIH quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. Results The search strategy yielded a total of 427 articles, out of which 25 studies examined the correlation between reflux diseases and CRS. The meta-analysis indicated a significant association between the presence of GERD and CRS compared to control groups ( P < .001; CI 3.56 [2.25, 5.65]), as well as significantly higher pH values and pepsin detection in CRS patients when compared to healthy individuals ( P = .003). Furthermore, all studies that evaluated proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in CRS patients reported positive outcomes, with 93% of CRS patients showing improvement on PPIs. Conclusion The existing literature provides suggestive evidence of an association between reflux diseases and CRS, with regards to both prevalence and treatment. Nonetheless, further studies are required to confirm this relationship.
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) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".