Prevalence and clinical profile of fungal rhinosinusitis.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
There are only a few landmark studies from the Indian subcontinent on fungal rhinosinusitis. The lack of awareness among clinicians regarding the varying clinical presentations of fungal rhinosinusitis prompted us to undertake this study.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the prevalence, etiologic basis, clinical features, radiologic features, and microscopic features of fungal rhinosinusitis, and to evaluate the various treatment modalities available.
METHODS
This was a prospective study in which evaluation of 100 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis was done. Specimens collected were subjected to both microbiology and pathologic examination; data collected, including clinical and radiologic features, were analyzed by the Pearson χ(2) test and Fisher's exact test.
RESULTS
The prevalence of fungal rhinosinusitis in our study was 30% (n = 30). Mucor was the most commonly isolated species (n = 15 [50%]) of fungus. Pathologic examination had a higher sensitivity (76.67%) compared with microbiology tests (50%) in the diagnosis of fungal rhinosinusitis. Fungus ball (n = 14 [46.6%]) was the most prevalent entity in the spectrum of fungal rhinosinusitis. Forty percent of cases (n = 12) were of invasive fungal rhinosinusitis. The prevalence of fungal rhinosinusitis was higher among individuals who were immunocompetent (n = 17 [56.6%]). Of patients who were immunocompromised, 84.6% (n = 11) had mucormycosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Unilateral involvement of paranasal sinuses was more in favor of fungal etiology. Complications were more common in fungal rhinosinusitis caused by Mucor species. Mucormycosis, a rare clinical entity, in subjects who were immunocompetent, had a high prevalence in our study.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.