牙源性上颌窦炎微生物学与慢性鼻窦炎的比较:一项 Meta 分析。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-17 DOI:10.1177/19458924241259333
Chang Lu, Yue Zhao, Yicheng Qin, Xi Zhang, Xiaozhe Yang, Yan Zhao, Xiangdong Wang, Jiang Lin
{"title":"牙源性上颌窦炎微生物学与慢性鼻窦炎的比较:一项 Meta 分析。","authors":"Chang Lu, Yue Zhao, Yicheng Qin, Xi Zhang, Xiaozhe Yang, Yan Zhao, Xiangdong Wang, Jiang Lin","doi":"10.1177/19458924241259333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Subtypes of sinusitis have different symptoms and prognoses due to different pathogens. Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) mainly occurs unilaterally and is different from chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) usually occurring bilaterally in terms of clinical characteristics. However, comprehensive microbiological comparisons between OMS and CRS have never been systematically conducted and most comparisons are methodologically biased. This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the microbiology associated with OMS and CRS through a meta-analysis approach in order to provide evidence for differential diagnosis of OMS and CRS from a microbiological perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The databases PubMed and CNKI were searched from their inception to July 2023. A random-effects model was employed to derive the pooled prevalence estimates of the identified bacterial species or genera.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 17 represented studies included 6 concerning OMS, 12 concerning CRS, and 4 concerning normal sinus, yielding 191, 610, and 92 samples, respectively. Though not statistically significant, the prevalence of <i>Peptostreptococcus</i> and <i>Prevotella</i> was generally higher in OMS compared to CRS. Notably, <i>Fusobacterium</i> was identified as the only genus with a significantly higher prevalence in OMS compared to CRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong><i>Fusobacterium</i> was significantly more prevalent in OMS compared with CRS, while <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> was more prevalent in CRS than in OMS. Such differences in bacterial profile may partly explain the distinct pathology observed and contribute to the development of novel strategies for diagnosis and therapeutic interventions in OMS.</p>","PeriodicalId":7650,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","volume":" ","pages":"324-332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis Microbiology Compared With Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Chang Lu, Yue Zhao, Yicheng Qin, Xi Zhang, Xiaozhe Yang, Yan Zhao, Xiangdong Wang, Jiang Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19458924241259333\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Subtypes of sinusitis have different symptoms and prognoses due to different pathogens. Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) mainly occurs unilaterally and is different from chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) usually occurring bilaterally in terms of clinical characteristics. However, comprehensive microbiological comparisons between OMS and CRS have never been systematically conducted and most comparisons are methodologically biased. This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the microbiology associated with OMS and CRS through a meta-analysis approach in order to provide evidence for differential diagnosis of OMS and CRS from a microbiological perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The databases PubMed and CNKI were searched from their inception to July 2023. A random-effects model was employed to derive the pooled prevalence estimates of the identified bacterial species or genera.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 17 represented studies included 6 concerning OMS, 12 concerning CRS, and 4 concerning normal sinus, yielding 191, 610, and 92 samples, respectively. Though not statistically significant, the prevalence of <i>Peptostreptococcus</i> and <i>Prevotella</i> was generally higher in OMS compared to CRS. Notably, <i>Fusobacterium</i> was identified as the only genus with a significantly higher prevalence in OMS compared to CRS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong><i>Fusobacterium</i> was significantly more prevalent in OMS compared with CRS, while <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> was more prevalent in CRS than in OMS. Such differences in bacterial profile may partly explain the distinct pathology observed and contribute to the development of novel strategies for diagnosis and therapeutic interventions in OMS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"324-332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924241259333\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19458924241259333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于病原体不同,鼻窦炎的亚型具有不同的症状和预后。牙源性上颌窦炎(OMS)主要发生在单侧,与通常发生在双侧的慢性鼻窦炎(CRS)在临床特征上有所不同。然而,OMS 和 CRS 之间的全面微生物学比较从未系统地进行过,而且大多数比较在方法上存在偏差。本研究旨在通过荟萃分析方法对与 OMS 和 CRS 相关的微生物学进行全面分析,以便从微生物学角度为 OMS 和 CRS 的鉴别诊断提供证据:方法:对PubMed和CNKI数据库从开始到2023年7月进行了检索。结果:17 项代表性研究中有 6 项涉及 OMS 和 CRS:17项代表性研究中,6项涉及OMS,12项涉及CRS,4项涉及正常鼻窦,分别获得191、610和92个样本。尽管没有统计学意义,但与 CRS 相比,OMS 中肽链球菌和普雷沃茨菌的感染率普遍较高。值得注意的是,与 CRS 相比,镰刀菌是唯一一个在 OMS 中流行率明显较高的菌属:结论:与 CRS 相比,镰刀菌在 OMS 中的流行率明显更高,而金黄色葡萄球菌在 CRS 中的流行率则高于 OMS。细菌谱的这种差异可部分解释所观察到的不同病理现象,并有助于开发新的 OMS 诊断和治疗干预策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Odontogenic Maxillary Sinusitis Microbiology Compared With Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Subtypes of sinusitis have different symptoms and prognoses due to different pathogens. Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis (OMS) mainly occurs unilaterally and is different from chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) usually occurring bilaterally in terms of clinical characteristics. However, comprehensive microbiological comparisons between OMS and CRS have never been systematically conducted and most comparisons are methodologically biased. This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the microbiology associated with OMS and CRS through a meta-analysis approach in order to provide evidence for differential diagnosis of OMS and CRS from a microbiological perspective.

Methods: The databases PubMed and CNKI were searched from their inception to July 2023. A random-effects model was employed to derive the pooled prevalence estimates of the identified bacterial species or genera.

Results: The 17 represented studies included 6 concerning OMS, 12 concerning CRS, and 4 concerning normal sinus, yielding 191, 610, and 92 samples, respectively. Though not statistically significant, the prevalence of Peptostreptococcus and Prevotella was generally higher in OMS compared to CRS. Notably, Fusobacterium was identified as the only genus with a significantly higher prevalence in OMS compared to CRS.

Conclusion: Fusobacterium was significantly more prevalent in OMS compared with CRS, while Staphylococcus aureus was more prevalent in CRS than in OMS. Such differences in bacterial profile may partly explain the distinct pathology observed and contribute to the development of novel strategies for diagnosis and therapeutic interventions in OMS.

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
5.60
自引率
11.50%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication committed to expanding knowledge and publishing the best clinical and basic research within the fields of Rhinology & Allergy. Its focus is to publish information which contributes to improved quality of care for patients with nasal and sinus disorders. Its primary readership consists of otolaryngologists, allergists, and plastic surgeons. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials, and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Dupilumab Treatment for Aspirin-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease in a Real-World Setting: Impact on Quality of Life and Healthcare Utilization. The Effect of the Nasal Structure on the Olfactory Cleft Airflow: A Systematic Review. Common Cold Coronavirus 229E Induces Higher Interferon Stimulating Gene Responses in Human Nasal Epithelial Cells from Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Polyposis. Doing the Rhinologic Work, From Humans to Mice to Robots. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Promotes Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase Expression Contributes to Development of Allergic Rhinitis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1