The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic Review of Immunotherapy for Chronic Rhinosinusitis
Abstract
Background Immunotherapy (IT) has been well established as an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR), but little is known about the benefits of IT on clinical outcomes of comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The goal of this publication is to systematically review the literature regarding outcomes of IT in patients with atopic CRS. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted including studies that assessed the efficacy of IT on clinical outcome measures in CRS including without polyp, with polyp, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis subgroups. Excluded articles were those only reporting outcomes specific to asthma or AR. Results Seven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review, none of which were randomized controlled trials. Generally, symptom scores improved in patients treated with IT when compared with baseline data and control patients. Objective endoscopic exam measures improved with IT treatment in short-term studies. Significant improvements were observed in radiographic assessments, and there was a decreased necessity for revision surgery, interventional office visits, and intranasal and oral steroid use. Conclusion Conclusions are limited by the paucity of available data on the efficacy of IT for treating CRS-specific outcome measures. There is weak evidence to support the use of IT as an adjunctive treatment in CRS patients, particularly in the postoperative period.
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?
Efficacy tests do not support the use of allergen immunotherapy in chronic rhinosinusitis.
“In addition, efficacy tests do not support its use in CRS [178].”
From Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [178]
The conclusions of a recent systematic review on the clinical efficacy of allergen immunotherapy in chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps and in allergic fungal rhinosinusitis were very limited owing to the scarcity of available data.
“A recent systematic review assessed the clinical efficacy of AIT in patients with CRS with and without NP and in patients with allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. The conclusions were very limited owing to the scarcity of available data.”
From Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [178]
Citations
Cites
Erekosima, N., Suarez‐Cuervo, C., Ramanathan, M., Kim, J. M., Chelladurai, Y., Segal, J. B., & Lin, S. Y. (2014) · The Laryngoscope · doi:10.1002/lary.24295 · Cited by 117
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Yehouessi-Vignikin B., Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis, S1879
- 10.1097/MOO.0b013e32835ac640 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1399-3038.2010.01124.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jaci.2008.06.003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2500/ajra.2013.27.3929 · DOI
- 10.2500/ajra.2010.24.3499 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2011.03794.x · DOI
- 10.2217/imt.12.157 · DOI
- Radulovic S., 2010, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 12, CD002893
- 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0385-8146(12)80018-6 · DOI
- 10.1177/019459989411000410 · DOI
- 10.1055/s-2007-1008433 · DOI
- 10.1097/00005537-199811000-00007 · DOI
- 10.1067/mhn.2002.129806 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61435-4 · DOI
- 10.1067/mhn.2001.119585 · DOI
- 10.2500/ajra.2009.23.3355a · DOI
- 10.1016/S0194-59989770203-1 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJM199908123410702 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.01011.x · DOI
- 10.2500/ar.2013.4.0045 · DOI
- 10.1002/alr.21141 · 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
- DeYoung, K., Wentzel, J. L., Schlosser, R. J., Nguyen, S. A., & Soler, Z. M.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 145-150
- ISSN
- 1945-8924 (ISSN-L)
- 1945-8932
- OpenAlex
- W1973523391
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 0.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Sinusitis and nasal conditions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Allergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
- Keywords
- immunotherapy, chronic rhinosinusitis, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, nasal polyps, symptom scores, endoscopic outcomes, radiographic outcomes, reoperation, intranasal corticosteroids, oral corticosteroids, adjunctive therapy
- MeSH terms
- Administration, Intranasal, Animals, Chronic Disease, Desensitization, Immunologic, Humans, Nasal Polyps, Rhinitis, Sinusitis, Evidence-Based Medicine, Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis
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