Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What's Actually Happening With MAP2K7

A possible concern is that the response rate to the questionnaire could be nondifferential, meaning that patients with significant occupational exposures might have been more prone to reply to the questionnaire, because of a tendency to attribute their condition to dirty work. However, a telephone survey in a random 10% sample of our subjects did not show a higher response rate to the postal questionnaires among exposed subjects than among nonexposed subjects. Another limitation might be our assessment of ��relevance�� of the reported occupational exposures. This relevance was verified by PKC412 clinical trial three physicians with experience in occupational health, who judged blindly and independently from each other whether the reported exposures were substantial enough to have an impact on their airways. Exposure was considered relevant only if two of the three experts had rated the exposure as positive. Alternative methods, such as specific job-exposure matrices (JEM), exist for the retrospective assessment of occupational exposures, but JEMs are not necessarily more valid, and expert judgment based on self-reported job descriptions has been used in many studies of occupational exposures and proven to be reliable [27, 28]. We did not simply compare patients who had undergone sinus surgery with patients who had not, but we also compared subjects who underwent multiple FESS with those who had only one FESS. The design of our study was appropriate to test our hypothesis on exposure to occupational Enasidenib price agents in relation to a need for revision sinus surgery. Here, the prevalence of reported work exposures among those who had more than one FESS was higher than among those with only one FESS. Moreover, the increase in the prevalence of occupational exposures with increasing number of FESS procedures provides MAP2K7 strong support for a causal relationship between work exposure and the failure of FESS. Importantly, our results were not due to confounding factors like atopy, concomitant asthma, nasal polyps, or current smoking. Although HMW agents such as flour, latex, and laboratory animals are the best-known causal factors of occupational airway disease [29], we found here that exposure to such classical inducers of IgE-mediated allergic asthma and rhinitis was not so prevalent (<5%) and the results were mainly driven by LMW agents. LMW sensitizers as well as irritants were frequently reported and often there was coexposure to both groups. Elucidating the pathogenesis of occupational rhinosinusitis and why LMW agents contribute to failure of healing following FESS is beyond the scope of this observational study. In conclusion, we provide novel evidence for exposure to occupational agents influencing the outcomes of sinus surgery and playing a role in the development and maintenance of sinonasal disease.</div>
Sign In or Register to comment.