The DOI matches its Crossref record.
To stent or not to stent? A meta‐analysis of endonasal congenital bilateral choanal atresia repair
Abstract
Objectives The use of nasal stents as a postoperative adjunct following repair of choanal atresia remains controversial. The study objective was to systematically review the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of stenting following transnasal endoscopic repair of bilateral choanal atresia. Study design Systematic review with meta-analysis. Methods A comprehensive search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Inclusion criteria included articles written in the English language with five or more subjects and clear intervention data and outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened studies for eligibility, appraised the level of evidence, extracted data, and resolved discrepancies by consensus. Successful surgery was defined as the absence of restenosis. Results Of 154 identified studies, 15 met inclusion criteria. Levels of evidence varied from level 3 to 4. Mean age at surgery ranged from 5 days to 25 months. Thirteen studies (n = 167 patients) included patients who were stented; the weighted pooled proportion of successful surgery was 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49-76%). Mean duration of stenting ranged from 48 hours to 16 weeks. Six studies (n = 42) evaluated patients who were not stented; the weighted pooled proportion of successful surgery was 64% (95% CI, 42-84%). Complications associated with stenting included alar injury, vestibular stenosis, columellar tear, and stent dislodgement or blockage. Conclusions Success rates for bil…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The endoscopic approach is replacing other approaches in choanal atresia.
“The endoscopic approach is replacing other approaches [257-259] in choanal atresia.”
From Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [258]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- 10.1016/j.otc.2009.01.001 · DOI
- 10.1097/MOO.0b013e328332a4ce · DOI
- 10.1002/lary.23381 · DOI
- 10.1001/archotol.128.4.401 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2013.12.017 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · DOI · Paper page
- OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine. Available at:http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653. Accessed March 24 2015.
- 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90085-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s00405-012-1956-0 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0022215109991861 · DOI
- Al‐Ammar AY, 2008, The use of nasal stent for choanal atresia, Saudi Med J, 29, 437
- 10.1001/archotol.134.10.1090 · DOI
- 10.1097/SCS.0000000000000541 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.02.063 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.01.033 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2010.03.026 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2010.03.027 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-008-0654-4 · DOI
- 10.1001/archoto.2007.20 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2006.01.009 · DOI
- 10.1097/00005537-200202000-00021 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.03.019 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ijporl.2009.10.027 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment
SEAIC Rhinoconjunctivitis Committee & SEORL Rhinology, A., Valero, A., Navarro, A., del Cuvillo, A., Alobid, I., Benito, Jr., Colás, C., de los Santos, G., Fernández Liesa, R., García-Lliberós, A., et al. (2018) · Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.18176/jiaci.0232 · Cited by 76
Metadata
- Authors
- Strychowsky, J. E., Kawai, K., Moritz, E., Rahbar, R., & Adil, E. A.
- Affiliations
- Boston Children's Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Adil, Eelam A.
- Venue
- The Laryngoscope
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-05-25
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 218-227
- ISSN
- 0023-852X (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4995
- OpenAlex
- W1895891599
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 3.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Laryngoscope (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics (clinical) › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
- Keywords
- bilateral choanal atresia, nasal stent, endoscopic endonasal surgery, restenosis, stent complications, mitomycin C, pediatric airway surgery
- MeSH terms
- Choanal Atresia, Endoscopy, Humans, Stents
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review