RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To study the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests for detecting laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in patients with primary burning mouth syndrome (BMS). METHODS: Patients with BMS and asymptomatic individuals were consecutively recruited from September 2018 to June 2023. Patients underwent hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance pH-monitoring (HEMII-pH) and saliva collections to measure pepsin. Stomatology evaluation was carried out to exclude other causes of BMS. Oral, pharyngeal and laryngeal signs and symptoms were evaluated with Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA) and Reflux Symptom Score (RSS). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of pepsin test were calculated considering the highest values of pepsin tests at ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL cutoffs. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with both BMS and LPR at the HEMII-pH and 21 asymptomatic individuals were recruited. Pepsin test was 83.7%, 79.6%, and 71.4% sensitive at cutoffs ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL, respectively. The ROC analysis reported that a threshold of ≥ 21.5 ng/mL was associated with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 81.6%, 81.0%, 90.1% and 65.4%, respectively. The severity score of burning mouth symptom was significantly associated with the saliva pepsin concentration (rs = 0.263; p = 0.029) and the oral RSA (rs = 0.474; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Pepsin test is a valuable diagnostic approach for detecting LPR in patients with BMS. Patients with high level of saliva pepsin reported more severe burning mouth symptoms. Future studies are needed to confirm the role of LPR in the primary BMS.
Assuntos
Síndrome da Ardência Bucal , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo , Humanos , Saliva/química , Pepsina A/análise , Síndrome da Ardência Bucal/etiologia , Síndrome da Ardência Bucal/complicações , Estudos Prospectivos , Monitoramento do pH Esofágico , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo/complicações , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo/diagnóstico , Impedância ElétricaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Chatbot generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT) is a new artificial intelligence-powered language model of chatbot able to help otolaryngologists in practice and research. We investigated the accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5 and -4 in the referencing of manuscripts published in otolaryngology. METHODS: ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 were interrogated for providing references of the top-30 most cited papers in otolaryngology in the past 40 years including clinical guidelines and key studies that changed the practice. The responses were regenerated three times to assess the accuracy and stability of ChatGPT. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 were compared for accuracy of reference and potential mistakes. RESULTS: The accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 ranged from 47% to 60%, and 73% to 87%, respectively (p < 0.005). ChatGPT-3.5 provided 19 inaccurate references and invented 2 references throughout the regenerated questions. ChatGPT-4.0 provided 13 inaccurate references, while it proposed only one invented reference. The stability of responses throughout regenerated answers was mild (k = 0.238) and moderate (k = 0.408) for ChatGPT-3.5 and 4.0, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT-4.0 reported higher accuracy than the free-access version (3.5). False references were detected in both 3.5 and 4.0 versions. Practitioners need to be careful regarding the use of ChatGPT in the reach of some key reference when writing a report.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Otolaringologia , Humanos , Software , Otorrinolaringologistas , IdiomaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reliability and validity of the Artificial Intelligence Performance Instrument (AIPI). METHODS: Medical records of patients consulting in otolaryngology were evaluated by physicians and ChatGPT for differential diagnosis, management, and treatment. The ChatGPT performance was rated twice using AIPI within a 7-day period to assess test-retest reliability. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's α. Internal validity was evaluated by comparing the AIPI scores of the clinical cases rated by ChatGPT and 2 blinded practitioners. Convergent validity was measured by comparing the AIPI score with a modified version of the Ottawa Clinical Assessment Tool (OCAT). Interrater reliability was assessed using Kendall's tau. RESULTS: Forty-five patients completed the evaluations (28 females). The AIPI Cronbach's alpha analysis suggested an adequate internal consistency (α = 0.754). The test-retest reliability was moderate-to-strong for items and the total score of AIPI (rs = 0.486, p = 0.001). The mean AIPI score of the senior otolaryngologist was significantly higher compared to the score of ChatGPT, supporting adequate internal validity (p = 0.001). Convergent validity reported a moderate and significant correlation between AIPI and modified OCAT (rs = 0.319; p = 0.044). The interrater reliability reported significant positive concordance between both otolaryngologists for the patient feature, diagnostic, additional examination, and treatment subscores as well as for the AIPI total score. CONCLUSIONS: AIPI is a valid and reliable instrument in assessing the performance of ChatGPT in ear, nose and throat conditions. Future studies are needed to investigate the usefulness of AIPI in medicine and surgery, and to evaluate the psychometric properties in these fields.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Feminino , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Psicometria , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Sialendoscopy has emerged in the last decades as a groundbreaking technique, offering a minimally invasive approach for exploring and managing salivary gland disorders. More recently, the advent of chatbots, powered by advanced natural processing language and artificial intelligence algorithms, has revolutionized the way healthcare professionals and patients access and analyze medical information and potentially will support soon the clinical decision-making process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional study was designed to assess the level of agreement between Chat-GPT and 10 expert sialendoscopists aiming the capabilities of Chat-GPT to further improve the management of salivary gland disorders. RESULTS: The mean level of agreement was 3.4 (SD: 0.69; Min: 2, Max: 4) for Chat-GPT's answers while it was 4.1 (SD: 0.56; Min: 3, Max: 5) for the group of EESS (p < 0.015). The overall Wilcoxon signed-rank test yielded a significance level of p < 0.026 when comparing the level of agreement between Chat-GPT and EESS. The mean number of therapeutic alternatives suggested by Chat-GPT was 3.33 (SD: 1.2; Min: 2, Max: 5), while it was 2.6 (SD: 0.51; Min: 2, Max: 3) for the group of EESS; p = 0.286 (95% CI - 0.385 to 1.320). CONCLUSION: Chat-GPT represents a promising tool in the clinical decision-making process within the salivary gland clinic, particularly for patients who are candidates for sialendoscopy treatment. Additionally, it serves as a valuable source of information for patients. However, further development is necessary to enhance the reliability of these tools and ensure their safety and optimal use in the clinical setting.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Doenças das Glândulas Salivares , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Transversais , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Endoscopia/métodos , Doenças das Glândulas Salivares/cirurgia , Alanina TransaminaseRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and recovery of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 patients 24 months after the infection. METHODS: From 22 March 2020 to 5 June 2022, 251 COVID-19 patients were followed in three European medical centres. Olfactory function was assessed with subjective patient-reported outcome questionnaires and odour identification tests at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postinfection. The predictive values of epidemiological and clinical data were investigated with multivariate analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-one patients completed the evaluations. The odour identification test revealed that 123 patients (50.8%) had OD at baseline. The prevalence of persistent psychophysical abnormalities at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months post-COVID-19 was 24.2%, 17.9%, 5.8% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). Parosmia occurred in 40 patients (23.4%) and lasted 60 ± 119 days. At 2 years, 51 patients (29.8%) self reported that their olfaction was unnormalised. Older patients had better odour identification evaluations at baseline (p < 0.001) but those with OD reported lower odour identification test scores at the end of the follow-up. Parosmia occurred more frequently in young patients. The olfactory training was significantly associated with higher values of Sniffin' Sticks tests at 18 months postinfection (rs = 0.678; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Two years post-COVID-19, 29.8% of patients reported persistent OD, but only 2.9% had abnormal identification psychophysical evaluations.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos do Olfato , Humanos , Olfato , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Prevalência , Transtornos do Olfato/epidemiologia , Transtornos do Olfato/etiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To investigate effectiveness of olfactory training (OT) in COVID-19 patients with persistent olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: From March 2020 to March 2022, COVID-19 patients with OD were prospectively followed in three European medical centers for a period of 18 months. A standardized OT protocol were recommended to patients. Patient-reported outcome questionnaires and psychophysical evaluations were used to evaluate olfaction at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months after the start of OT. The evolution of olfactory outcome was compared according to the adherence to the OT protocol. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients completed the evaluations. Thirty-two patients fully adhered to the OT, while 25 did not adhere. The psychophysical scores significantly improved from baseline to 6-month post-infection in both groups. In the OT group, the psychophysical scores continued to significantly improve from 6 to 12 months after the start of OT (p = 0.032). The mean duration of OT was 15.4 weeks. The mean delay of patient recovery perception was comparable between groups (27.4 weeks). The occurrence of cacosmia (35.1%) and parosmia (43.9%) throughout the follow-up period was comparable between groups. There proportion of phantosmia was higher in training (34.4%) compared with no-OT (16.0%; p = 0.007) group. The baseline Sniffin'Sticks tests was positively associated with the 6-month Sniffin'Sticks tests (rs = 0.685; p < 0.001) and negatively associated with the time of recovery (rs = - 0.369; p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: The adherence to an OT protocol was associated with better mid-term improvement of psychophysical scores. Future large-cohort randomized-controlled studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of OT in COVID-19 patients.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos do Olfato , Humanos , Olfato , Estudos Prospectivos , Treinamento Olfativo , Transtornos do Olfato/etiologia , Transtornos do Olfato/terapia , Transtornos do Olfato/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence and the evolution of olfactory disorders (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients infected during the first and the second European waves. METHODS: From March 2020 to October 2020, COVID-19 patients with OD were recruited and followed over the 12-month post-infection. The following data were collected: demographic, treatments, vaccination status, and olfactory function. Olfaction was assessed with the Olfactory Disorder Questionnaire (ODQ), and threshold, discrimination, and identification (TDI) test. Outcomes were compared between patients of the first wave (group 1: wild/D614G virus) and the second wave (group 2: B.1.1.7. Alpha variant) at 1-, 3- and 12-month post-infection. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the evaluations accounting for 33 and 27 patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. The 1-month TDI score (23.7 ± 5.3) was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (29.8 ± 8.7; p = 0.017). Proportion of normosmic patients at 1-month post-infection was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (p = 0.009). TDI scores only significantly increased from 1- to 3-month post-infection in anosmic and hyposmic patients. Focusing on There was a negative association between the 1-month ODQ and the 1-month TDI (rs = - 0.493; p = 0.012). ODQ was a significant predictor of TDI scores at 3- and 12-month post-infection. The 12-month prevalence of parosmia was 60.6% in group 1 and 42.4% in group 2, respectively. There was no significant influence of oral corticosteroid treatment, adherence to an olfactory training and vaccination status on the olfactory outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of the second wave (Alpha B.1.1.7. variant) reported significant higher proportion of psychophysical test abnormalities at 1-month post-infection than patients infected during the first wave (D614G virus).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos do Olfato , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/complicações , SARS-CoV-2 , Prevalência , Transtornos do Olfato/etiologia , Transtornos do Olfato/complicações , OlfatoRESUMO
Titanium plates and screws are essential devices in maxillofacial surgery since late 1980s, but despite their wide use there is no consensus in titanium internal fixators removal after bone healing. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted on seventeen retrospective studies. Effect size and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for plate removal (per plate and per patient) and for removal causes (infection, pain, screws complications, exposition, palpability). Odds ratio, 95% confidence intervals, and χ 2 test were measured for sex, smoking, and implant site. Heterogeneity was evaluated with Cochran and Inconstancy test. Obtained data were used to design Forest and Funnel plots. The aim of the study is to identify and clarify reasons and risk factors for plates and screws removal. Infection is the most frequent reason; the habit of tobacco usage and implant site (mandibula) are the main risk factors. The administration of antibiotic prophylaxis is essential, and patients must quit smoking before and after surgery. In conclusion there is no scientific evidence supporting the removal of internal devices as mandatory step of the postoperative procedure.
Assuntos
Cirurgia Bucal , Titânio , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Placas Ósseas , Mandíbula/cirurgia , Remoção de Dispositivo , Fixação Interna de Fraturas/métodosRESUMO
PURPOSE: Tracheoesophageal speech is considered the gold standard for rehabilitation following total laryngectomy. The main reason of voice prosthesis failure is the endoprosthesis leakage. Provox ActiValve® incorporates a magnet-based valve system to achieve active closure of the valve to treat these leakages, with the drawback of being significantly more expensive. The aim of the study was to compare the Provox Vega® and Provox ActiValve® duration and costs in patients with replacements increase due to endoprosthetic leakage. METHODS: Prospective case-crossover study in laryngectomized patients with Provox Vega® and endoprosthesis leakage to whom a Provox ActiValve® was placed. Survival and possible factors that affect voice prosthesis were studied using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox Proportional Hazards Regression. Cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the Spanish Public National Health System with incremental cost-effectiveness calculation was performed. RESULTS: A total of 159 prostheses were evaluated. The most frequent reason for replacement was the endoprosthesis leakage (N = 129; 83.77%) in both models. The mean duration-time of Provox Vega® was 44.77 ± 2.82 days (CI 95%, 39.18-50.35; median 36 days), and 317.34 ± 116.8 days (CI 95% 86.66-548; median 286 days) for the Provox ActiValve® (p < 0.000). For every replacement not made thanks to the Provox ActiValve® there was saving of 133.97 CONCLUSIONS: The Provox ActiValve® is a cost-effective solution in patients with increased prosthesis replacements due to endoprosthetic leakage, reducing the number of changes and cost compared to Provox Vega®.
Assuntos
Laringe Artificial , Análise Custo-Benefício , Estudos Cross-Over , Humanos , Laringectomia/efeitos adversos , Laringectomia/reabilitação , Imãs , Desenho de Prótese , Falha de PróteseRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim was to evaluate potential predictive factors of smell recovery in a clinical series of 288 patients presenting olfactory dysfunction (OD) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Potential correlations were sought between epidemiological, clinical and immunological characteristics of patients and the persistence of OD at 60 days. METHODS: COVID-19 positive patients presenting OD were prospectively recruited from three European hospitals. Baseline clinical and olfactory evaluations were performed within the first 2 weeks after OD onset and repeated at 30 and 60 days. In a subgroup of patients, anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies were measured in serum, saliva and nasal secretions at 60 days. RESULTS: A total of 288 COVID-19 patients with OD were included in the study. Two weeks after the onset of the loss of smell, 52.4% of patients had OD on psychophysical tests, including 113 cases (39.2%) of anosmia and 38 cases (13.2%) of hyposmia. At 60-day follow-up, 25.4% of the patients presented persistent OD. There was no significant correlation between sex, age, viral load on nasopharyngeal swab or COVID-19 severity and poor olfactory outcome. In a subgroup of 63 patients, it was demonstrated that patients with poor olfactory outcomes at 60 days had lower levels of salivary and nasal immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgG1, but similar levels of antibodies in the serum. CONCLUSIONS: No clinical markers predicted the evolution of OD at 60 days. Patients with poor olfactory outcome at 60 days had lower saliva and nasal antibodies, suggesting a role for local immune responses in the persistence of COVID-19 related OD.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtornos do Olfato , Anosmia , Humanos , Transtornos do Olfato/epidemiologia , Transtornos do Olfato/etiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , OlfatoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate prevalence and epidemiological and clinical factors associated with olfactory dysfunction (OD) and gustatory dysfunction (GD) in COVID-19 patients according to the disease severity. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: A total of 2579 patients with a positive diagnosis of COVID-19 were identified between March 22 and June 3, 2020 from 18 European hospitals. Epidemiological and clinical data were extracted. Otolaryngological symptoms, including OD and GD, were collected through patient-reported outcome questionnaire and Sniffin'Sticks tests were carried out in a subset of patients. RESULTS: A total of 2579 patients were included, including 2166 mild (84.0%), 144 moderate (5.6%) and 269 severe-to-critical (10.4%) patients. Mild patients presented an otolaryngological picture of the disease with OD, GD, nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea and sore throat as the most prevalent symptoms. The prevalence of subjective OD and GD was 73.7 and 46.8%, and decreases with the severity of the disease. Females had higher prevalence of subjective OD and GD compared with males. Diabetes was associated with a higher risk to develop GD. Among the subset of patients who benefited from psychophysical olfactory evaluations, there were 75 anosmic, 43 hyposmic and 113 normosmic patients. The prevalence of anosmia significantly decreased with the severity of the disease. Anosmia or hyposmia were not associated with any nasal disorder, according to SNOT-22. CONCLUSION: OD and GD are more prevalent in patients with mild COVID-19 compared with individuals with moderate, severe or critical diseases. Females might have a higher risk of developing OD and GD compared with males.