激光鼻后神经松解术射频消融下鼻甲治疗慢性鼻炎。

IF 7.2 2区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Yi-Li Hwang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, Ting-Yu Shih, Han-Lo Teng, Bor-Hwang Kang, Chien-Yu Huang
{"title":"激光鼻后神经松解术射频消融下鼻甲治疗慢性鼻炎。","authors":"Yi-Li Hwang,&nbsp;Jyun-Yi Liao,&nbsp;Ying-Shuo Hsu,&nbsp;Ming-Shao Tsai,&nbsp;Ting-Yu Shih,&nbsp;Han-Lo Teng,&nbsp;Bor-Hwang Kang,&nbsp;Chien-Yu Huang","doi":"10.1002/alr.23580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Posterior nasal nerve neurolysis (PNNN) is a potential approach for treating chronic rhinitis among patients unresponsive to pharmacological therapy [<span>1</span>]. However, the treatment response was not immediate. Studies by Lee and Takashima found a response rate of 67.5%–76.2% at 3 months and varied up to 80.6%–85.5% at 12 months [<span>2, 3</span>]. These radiofrequency (RF) PNNN devices have also been patented and can only be legally used in the US; hence, other countries have been left with no effective modality to support the use of PNNN. Other modalities to perform PNNN include Krespi et al., who proposed using a diode laser to perform PNNN [<span>4</span>], and Samy et al., who used RF ablation of the posterior end of the inferior turbinate to treat the peripheral branches of the posterior nasal nerve [<span>5</span>] showed significant improvement in chronic rhinitis symptoms.</p><p>With this background, we hypothesized that combining radiofrequency ablation of inferior turbinates and intraturbinate segments of the posterior nasal nerve (RAPN) with laser PNNN (collectively abbreviated as RPN3) may improve short-term response rates and enhance symptom control.</p><p>The inclusion criteria were: age 18–65 years, chronic rhinitis refractory to medical treatment for &gt;6 months with at least 4 weeks of medical treatments, rTNSS ≥ 5, rhinorrhea ≥2, and congestion ≥2. The exclusion criteria were rhinosinusitis, difficult posterior nasal passage, concurrent other or previous nasal surgery in the nasal and oral area, and rhinitis medicamentosa.</p><p>RPN3 surgery was performed as day surgery under local anesthesia in the operating room. Septoplasty was not performed in all cases. First, RAPN was performed using an Olympus Celon Elite ESG-400 (Olympus Europa, Hamburg, Germany) at 15 W with a needle RF probe. RF was applied to the turbinate and ablated the head, middle and posterior aspect of the inferior turbinate, including the mulberry, and the superior, medial and inferior aspect of the posterior end of the turbinates, aiming to reduce the intraturbinate segment of the posterior nasal nerves, with 15–20 punctures on each turbinate. Second, laser PNNN was performed using a 2-W continuous wave laser with the AcuPulse CO<sub>2</sub> laser (Lumenis Ltd., Yokne'am Illit, Israel) transmitted via a nasal probe with a straight-tip 90°mirror. Each side takes 2–3 min to complete the ablation. After the procedure, the inferior turbinate head was covered with Hemopatch (Baxter International, Deerfield, US) to prevent bleeding, which could be removed within 1 week and keeps the inferior meatus patent after removal.</p><p>Of the 54 enrolled in the study, 50 completed the 6-month follow-ups. The enrolled patient's characteristics, procedure information, and baseline rhinitis data are reported in Table 1.</p><p>Both rTNSS and NOSE scores showed significant post-surgical improvement. From baseline scores of 8.7 (95% CI, 8.2–9.2) and 61.6 (95% CI, 56.8–66.3), respectively, rTNSS decreased to 1.46 (95% CI, 1.9–1.1) and NOSE to 2.9 (95% CI, 4.4–1.4) at 6 months (both <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Response rates were consistently high, reaching 100% for both measures by 6 months, with strong early response rates from the first month onward. Subscore analysis showed significant change in all subscores (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) when comparing each follow-up timepoint to the baseline. The rTNSS subscores showed an improvement of 74.9%–92.4%, while the NOSE subscore showed an improvement of 93.3%–97.7% (Figure 1). During the 6-month follow-up, one case developed anterior nasal bleeding that was resolved after 3 days of merocel packing.</p><p>The clinical response rate of PNNN, defined by a ≥30% reduction in the baseline total rTNSS, has been reported to range from 67.5% to 85.5% at follow-up [<span>2, 3</span>]. Our proposed RPN3 approach achieved response rates of 94% at 1 month and 100% at 6 months, establishing its efficacy for chronic rhinitis management.</p><p>The proposed RPN3 offers three key advantages: initial RAPN created an optimal working space for laser probe insertion, immediate symptom relief through RF turbinate reduction, and superior hemostasis with deeper nerve ablation compared to conventional methods. Huang et al.[<span>6</span>] demonstrated significantly better outcomes with RPN3 versus RAPN alone at 3-month follow-up, validating the benefits of this combined approach.</p><p>This study has three key limitations: (1) potential selection bias due to its retrospective design, (2) lack of head-to-head trials to differentiate the individual benefits of RAPN versus laser PNNN within the RPN3 procedure, and (3) relatively short follow-up period of 6 months. Future prospective studies with longer follow-up and comparative analysis are needed.</p><p>The proposed RPN3 technique is a minimally invasive surgery that significantly improves chronic rhinitis symptoms with early response rates.</p><p>Yi-Li Hwang, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, and Chien-Yu Huang designed and coordinated the study. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Ting-Yu Shih enrolled the study participants and conducted the surgery. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ting-Yu Shih, and Han-Lo Teng collected the clinical data and drafted the article. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Han-Lo Teng contributed significantly to the manuscript writing and documenting in most cases. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, Bor-Hwang Kang, and Ying-Shuo Hsu critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.</p><p>Study approval statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Chia-Yi Christian Hospital (IRB no: CYCH2024022).</p><p>The Institutional Review Board waived the need for informed consent due to the study's retrospective nature.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":13716,"journal":{"name":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","volume":"15 5","pages":"565-567"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alr.23580","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates With Laser Posterior Nasal Nerve Neurolysis for the Treatment of Chronic Rhinitis\",\"authors\":\"Yi-Li Hwang,&nbsp;Jyun-Yi Liao,&nbsp;Ying-Shuo Hsu,&nbsp;Ming-Shao Tsai,&nbsp;Ting-Yu Shih,&nbsp;Han-Lo Teng,&nbsp;Bor-Hwang Kang,&nbsp;Chien-Yu Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alr.23580\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Posterior nasal nerve neurolysis (PNNN) is a potential approach for treating chronic rhinitis among patients unresponsive to pharmacological therapy [<span>1</span>]. However, the treatment response was not immediate. Studies by Lee and Takashima found a response rate of 67.5%–76.2% at 3 months and varied up to 80.6%–85.5% at 12 months [<span>2, 3</span>]. These radiofrequency (RF) PNNN devices have also been patented and can only be legally used in the US; hence, other countries have been left with no effective modality to support the use of PNNN. Other modalities to perform PNNN include Krespi et al., who proposed using a diode laser to perform PNNN [<span>4</span>], and Samy et al., who used RF ablation of the posterior end of the inferior turbinate to treat the peripheral branches of the posterior nasal nerve [<span>5</span>] showed significant improvement in chronic rhinitis symptoms.</p><p>With this background, we hypothesized that combining radiofrequency ablation of inferior turbinates and intraturbinate segments of the posterior nasal nerve (RAPN) with laser PNNN (collectively abbreviated as RPN3) may improve short-term response rates and enhance symptom control.</p><p>The inclusion criteria were: age 18–65 years, chronic rhinitis refractory to medical treatment for &gt;6 months with at least 4 weeks of medical treatments, rTNSS ≥ 5, rhinorrhea ≥2, and congestion ≥2. The exclusion criteria were rhinosinusitis, difficult posterior nasal passage, concurrent other or previous nasal surgery in the nasal and oral area, and rhinitis medicamentosa.</p><p>RPN3 surgery was performed as day surgery under local anesthesia in the operating room. Septoplasty was not performed in all cases. First, RAPN was performed using an Olympus Celon Elite ESG-400 (Olympus Europa, Hamburg, Germany) at 15 W with a needle RF probe. RF was applied to the turbinate and ablated the head, middle and posterior aspect of the inferior turbinate, including the mulberry, and the superior, medial and inferior aspect of the posterior end of the turbinates, aiming to reduce the intraturbinate segment of the posterior nasal nerves, with 15–20 punctures on each turbinate. Second, laser PNNN was performed using a 2-W continuous wave laser with the AcuPulse CO<sub>2</sub> laser (Lumenis Ltd., Yokne'am Illit, Israel) transmitted via a nasal probe with a straight-tip 90°mirror. Each side takes 2–3 min to complete the ablation. After the procedure, the inferior turbinate head was covered with Hemopatch (Baxter International, Deerfield, US) to prevent bleeding, which could be removed within 1 week and keeps the inferior meatus patent after removal.</p><p>Of the 54 enrolled in the study, 50 completed the 6-month follow-ups. The enrolled patient's characteristics, procedure information, and baseline rhinitis data are reported in Table 1.</p><p>Both rTNSS and NOSE scores showed significant post-surgical improvement. From baseline scores of 8.7 (95% CI, 8.2–9.2) and 61.6 (95% CI, 56.8–66.3), respectively, rTNSS decreased to 1.46 (95% CI, 1.9–1.1) and NOSE to 2.9 (95% CI, 4.4–1.4) at 6 months (both <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Response rates were consistently high, reaching 100% for both measures by 6 months, with strong early response rates from the first month onward. Subscore analysis showed significant change in all subscores (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) when comparing each follow-up timepoint to the baseline. The rTNSS subscores showed an improvement of 74.9%–92.4%, while the NOSE subscore showed an improvement of 93.3%–97.7% (Figure 1). During the 6-month follow-up, one case developed anterior nasal bleeding that was resolved after 3 days of merocel packing.</p><p>The clinical response rate of PNNN, defined by a ≥30% reduction in the baseline total rTNSS, has been reported to range from 67.5% to 85.5% at follow-up [<span>2, 3</span>]. Our proposed RPN3 approach achieved response rates of 94% at 1 month and 100% at 6 months, establishing its efficacy for chronic rhinitis management.</p><p>The proposed RPN3 offers three key advantages: initial RAPN created an optimal working space for laser probe insertion, immediate symptom relief through RF turbinate reduction, and superior hemostasis with deeper nerve ablation compared to conventional methods. Huang et al.[<span>6</span>] demonstrated significantly better outcomes with RPN3 versus RAPN alone at 3-month follow-up, validating the benefits of this combined approach.</p><p>This study has three key limitations: (1) potential selection bias due to its retrospective design, (2) lack of head-to-head trials to differentiate the individual benefits of RAPN versus laser PNNN within the RPN3 procedure, and (3) relatively short follow-up period of 6 months. Future prospective studies with longer follow-up and comparative analysis are needed.</p><p>The proposed RPN3 technique is a minimally invasive surgery that significantly improves chronic rhinitis symptoms with early response rates.</p><p>Yi-Li Hwang, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, and Chien-Yu Huang designed and coordinated the study. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Ting-Yu Shih enrolled the study participants and conducted the surgery. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ting-Yu Shih, and Han-Lo Teng collected the clinical data and drafted the article. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Han-Lo Teng contributed significantly to the manuscript writing and documenting in most cases. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, Bor-Hwang Kang, and Ying-Shuo Hsu critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.</p><p>Study approval statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Chia-Yi Christian Hospital (IRB no: CYCH2024022).</p><p>The Institutional Review Board waived the need for informed consent due to the study's retrospective nature.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"565-567\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alr.23580\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alr.23580\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alr.23580","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

鼻后神经松解术(PNNN)是治疗对药物治疗无反应的慢性鼻炎患者的一种潜在方法。然而,治疗效果并非立竿见影。Lee和Takashima的研究发现,3个月的缓解率为67.5%-76.2%,12个月的缓解率为80.6%-85.5%[2,3]。这些射频(RF) PNNN设备也已获得专利,只能在美国合法使用;因此,其他国家没有任何有效的方式来支持PNNN的使用。其他进行PNNN的方式包括Krespi等人提出使用二极管激光进行PNNN [4], Samy等人使用射频消融下鼻甲后端治疗鼻后神经[5]的外周分支,慢性鼻炎症状得到显著改善。在此背景下,我们假设联合射频消融下鼻甲和鼻后神经(RAPN)与激光PNNN(统称为RPN3)可以提高短期反应率并加强症状控制。纳入标准为:年龄18-65岁,慢性鼻炎药物治疗难治6个月且药物治疗至少4周,rTNSS≥5,鼻漏≥2,充血≥2。排除标准为鼻窦炎、后鼻通道困难、鼻口区同时有其他或既往鼻手术、药物性鼻炎。RPN3手术在局麻下于手术室进行日间手术。并非所有病例均行鼻中隔成形术。首先,RAPN使用Olympus Celon Elite ESG-400 (Olympus Europa, Hamburg, Germany)在15 W下使用射频探针进行。射频应用于鼻甲,消融下鼻甲的头、中、后侧面,包括桑,以及鼻甲后端的上、中、下侧面,目的是减少鼻后神经的鼻甲内段,每个鼻甲穿刺15-20个。其次,使用2 w连续波激光器和AcuPulse CO2激光器(Lumenis Ltd., Yokne'am Illit, Israel)进行激光PNNN,该激光器通过带直端90°反射镜的鼻探头传输。每侧消融2-3分钟完成。术后用Hemopatch (Baxter International, Deerfield, US)覆盖下鼻甲头部,防止出血,可在1周内取下,取下后保持下鼻甲通畅。参与研究的54人中,有50人完成了为期6个月的随访。入组患者的特征、手术信息和鼻炎基线数据见表1。术后rTNSS和NOSE评分均有显著改善。基线评分分别为8.7 (95% CI, 8.2-9.2)和61.6 (95% CI, 56.8-66.3), 6个月时rTNSS降至1.46 (95% CI, 1.9-1.1), NOSE降至2.9 (95% CI, 4.4-1.4) (p &lt;0.001)。反应率一直很高,6个月时两项指标均达到100%,从第一个月起早期反应率就很高。分分分析显示,所有分分均有显著变化(p &lt;0.001),将每个随访时间点与基线进行比较。rTNSS评分改善74.9%-92.4%,NOSE评分改善93.3%-97.7%(图1)。在6个月的随访中,1例出现前鼻出血,经3天的美沙塞填塞后解决。PNNN的临床缓解率,定义为基线总rTNSS降低≥30%,据报道随访时的范围为67.5%至85.5%[2,3]。我们提出的RPN3方法在1个月和6个月时的有效率分别为94%和100%,确立了其治疗慢性鼻炎的有效性。所提出的RPN3具有三个关键优势:初始RAPN为激光探针插入创造了最佳的工作空间,通过射频鼻甲复位立即缓解症状,与传统方法相比,更深层的神经消融具有更好的止血作用。在3个月的随访中,Huang等人证实了RPN3与单独使用RAPN的疗效明显更好,验证了这种联合方法的益处。本研究有三个关键的局限性:(1)由于其回顾性设计而存在潜在的选择偏倚,(2)缺乏在RPN3手术中区分RAPN与激光PNNN的个体益处的头对头试验,以及(3)相对较短的6个月随访期。未来的前瞻性研究需要更长时间的随访和比较分析。RPN3技术是一种微创手术,可显著改善慢性鼻炎症状,早期缓解率高。黄宜利、徐英硕、蔡明绍和黄建宇设计并协调了这项研究。 黄建宇、廖俊毅和施廷玉招募了研究参与者并进行了手术。黄建宇、廖俊毅、施廷玉、滕汉洛收集临床资料并撰写文章。黄建宇、廖俊义、滕汉洛等人在大多数情况下对手稿的撰写和记录做出了重要贡献。黄建宇、廖俊义、徐应硕、蔡明绍、康宝黄、徐应硕对手稿的重要知识内容进行了批判性修改。所有作者都阅读并批准了最终稿件。研究批准声明:本研究已获嘉义基督教医院伦理委员会批准(IRB号:CYCH2024022)。由于该研究的回顾性,机构审查委员会放弃了知情同意的需要。作者声明无利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates With Laser Posterior Nasal Nerve Neurolysis for the Treatment of Chronic Rhinitis

Radiofrequency Ablation of Inferior Turbinates With Laser Posterior Nasal Nerve Neurolysis for the Treatment of Chronic Rhinitis

Posterior nasal nerve neurolysis (PNNN) is a potential approach for treating chronic rhinitis among patients unresponsive to pharmacological therapy [1]. However, the treatment response was not immediate. Studies by Lee and Takashima found a response rate of 67.5%–76.2% at 3 months and varied up to 80.6%–85.5% at 12 months [2, 3]. These radiofrequency (RF) PNNN devices have also been patented and can only be legally used in the US; hence, other countries have been left with no effective modality to support the use of PNNN. Other modalities to perform PNNN include Krespi et al., who proposed using a diode laser to perform PNNN [4], and Samy et al., who used RF ablation of the posterior end of the inferior turbinate to treat the peripheral branches of the posterior nasal nerve [5] showed significant improvement in chronic rhinitis symptoms.

With this background, we hypothesized that combining radiofrequency ablation of inferior turbinates and intraturbinate segments of the posterior nasal nerve (RAPN) with laser PNNN (collectively abbreviated as RPN3) may improve short-term response rates and enhance symptom control.

The inclusion criteria were: age 18–65 years, chronic rhinitis refractory to medical treatment for >6 months with at least 4 weeks of medical treatments, rTNSS ≥ 5, rhinorrhea ≥2, and congestion ≥2. The exclusion criteria were rhinosinusitis, difficult posterior nasal passage, concurrent other or previous nasal surgery in the nasal and oral area, and rhinitis medicamentosa.

RPN3 surgery was performed as day surgery under local anesthesia in the operating room. Septoplasty was not performed in all cases. First, RAPN was performed using an Olympus Celon Elite ESG-400 (Olympus Europa, Hamburg, Germany) at 15 W with a needle RF probe. RF was applied to the turbinate and ablated the head, middle and posterior aspect of the inferior turbinate, including the mulberry, and the superior, medial and inferior aspect of the posterior end of the turbinates, aiming to reduce the intraturbinate segment of the posterior nasal nerves, with 15–20 punctures on each turbinate. Second, laser PNNN was performed using a 2-W continuous wave laser with the AcuPulse CO2 laser (Lumenis Ltd., Yokne'am Illit, Israel) transmitted via a nasal probe with a straight-tip 90°mirror. Each side takes 2–3 min to complete the ablation. After the procedure, the inferior turbinate head was covered with Hemopatch (Baxter International, Deerfield, US) to prevent bleeding, which could be removed within 1 week and keeps the inferior meatus patent after removal.

Of the 54 enrolled in the study, 50 completed the 6-month follow-ups. The enrolled patient's characteristics, procedure information, and baseline rhinitis data are reported in Table 1.

Both rTNSS and NOSE scores showed significant post-surgical improvement. From baseline scores of 8.7 (95% CI, 8.2–9.2) and 61.6 (95% CI, 56.8–66.3), respectively, rTNSS decreased to 1.46 (95% CI, 1.9–1.1) and NOSE to 2.9 (95% CI, 4.4–1.4) at 6 months (both p < 0.001). Response rates were consistently high, reaching 100% for both measures by 6 months, with strong early response rates from the first month onward. Subscore analysis showed significant change in all subscores (p < 0.001) when comparing each follow-up timepoint to the baseline. The rTNSS subscores showed an improvement of 74.9%–92.4%, while the NOSE subscore showed an improvement of 93.3%–97.7% (Figure 1). During the 6-month follow-up, one case developed anterior nasal bleeding that was resolved after 3 days of merocel packing.

The clinical response rate of PNNN, defined by a ≥30% reduction in the baseline total rTNSS, has been reported to range from 67.5% to 85.5% at follow-up [2, 3]. Our proposed RPN3 approach achieved response rates of 94% at 1 month and 100% at 6 months, establishing its efficacy for chronic rhinitis management.

The proposed RPN3 offers three key advantages: initial RAPN created an optimal working space for laser probe insertion, immediate symptom relief through RF turbinate reduction, and superior hemostasis with deeper nerve ablation compared to conventional methods. Huang et al.[6] demonstrated significantly better outcomes with RPN3 versus RAPN alone at 3-month follow-up, validating the benefits of this combined approach.

This study has three key limitations: (1) potential selection bias due to its retrospective design, (2) lack of head-to-head trials to differentiate the individual benefits of RAPN versus laser PNNN within the RPN3 procedure, and (3) relatively short follow-up period of 6 months. Future prospective studies with longer follow-up and comparative analysis are needed.

The proposed RPN3 technique is a minimally invasive surgery that significantly improves chronic rhinitis symptoms with early response rates.

Yi-Li Hwang, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, and Chien-Yu Huang designed and coordinated the study. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Ting-Yu Shih enrolled the study participants and conducted the surgery. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ting-Yu Shih, and Han-Lo Teng collected the clinical data and drafted the article. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, and Han-Lo Teng contributed significantly to the manuscript writing and documenting in most cases. Chien-Yu Huang, Jyun-Yi Liao, Ying-Shuo Hsu, Ming-Shao Tsai, Bor-Hwang Kang, and Ying-Shuo Hsu critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Study approval statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Chia-Yi Christian Hospital (IRB no: CYCH2024022).

The Institutional Review Board waived the need for informed consent due to the study's retrospective nature.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
10.90%
发文量
185
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Forum of Allergy & Rhinologyis a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and the Official Journal of the American Rhinologic Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy. International Forum of Allergy Rhinology provides a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and others to publish original research and explore controversies in the medical and surgical treatment of patients with otolaryngic allergy, rhinologic, and skull base conditions. The application of current research to the management of otolaryngic allergy, rhinologic, and skull base diseases and the need for further investigation will be highlighted.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信