| Title |
Topical Drug Delivery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40136-012-0003-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan Liang, Andrew P. Lane |
| Abstract |
Chronic rhinosinusitis is a multifactorial disorder that may be heterogeneous in presentation and clinical course. While the introduction of endoscopic sinus surgery revolutionized surgical management and has led to significantly improved patient outcomes, medical therapy remains the foundation of long-term care of chronic rhinosinusitis, particularly in surgically recalcitrant cases. A variety of devices and pharmaceutical agents have been developed to apply topical medical therapy to the sinuses, taking advantage of the access provided by endoscopic surgery. The goal of topical therapy is to address the inflammation, infection, and mucociliary dysfunction that underlies the disease. Major factors that impact success include the patient's sinus anatomy and the dynamics of the delivery device. Despite a growing number of topical treatment options, the evidence-based literature to support their use is limited. In this article, we comprehensively review current delivery methods and the available topical agents. We also discuss biotechnological advances that promise enhanced delivery in the future, and evolving pharmacotherapeutical compounds that may be added to rhinologist's armamentarium. A complete understand of topical drug delivery is increasingly essential to the management of chronic rhinosinusitis when traditional forms of medical therapy and surgery have failed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 26% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2022.
All research outputs
#4,854,681
of 23,392,375 outputs
Outputs from Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports
#7
of 96 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,454
of 284,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,392,375 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 96 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them