BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to explore serological biomarkers which predict the outcome of tonsillectomy for chronic tonsillitis.MethodsA case study in a University ENT department of 24 adult patients with chronic tonsillitis (CHT) in comparison to 24 patients with acute peritonsillar abscess (PTA) was performed. Blood samples for clinical routine hematological and serological parameters were assessed prior to surgery (T-1) and five days (T5) after tonsillectomy. Outcome 6 months later (T180) was documented using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Specific Benefits from Tonsillectomy Inventory (SBTI). Correlation analyses between CHT and PTA group as well as between the different time points within each group concerning the serological parameters and the outcome parameters were performed.ResultsAt T-1, patients in the CHT group presented with significantly higher lymphocytes counts (relative and absolute), basophils (relative and absolute) and eosinophils but less white-cells, monocytes, neutrophils (absolute and relative), alpha-1, alpha-2, beta globulins, immunoglobulin and lower C-reactive protein and procalcitonin values than patients in the PTA group (all p < 0.05, respectively). Within each group, different significant changes of the serum parameters (often in opposite direction) were observed between T-1 and T5. SBTI scores at T-1 were significantly lower in the CHT group. In contrast, most GBI scores at T180 were significantly higher in the CHT group. Between T-1 and T180 the SBTI scores improved in three quarters of the CHT patients but only in three fifths of the PTA patients. Higher eosinophil counts and immunoglobulin E levels at T-1 predicted higher GBI scores at T180 in the CHT group.ConclusionsThis pilot study showed a specific serological pattern for patients with chronic tonsillitis with a specific pattern of changes after tonsillectomy. But there is no established role for biomarkers currently used in clinical practice to predict the outcome of tonsillectomy for chronic tonsillitis.
Purpose
To assess corneal densitometry in patients with Fabry disease (FD) and to compare corneal densitometry differences in FD patients to different corneal manifestations.
Methods
Ten participants (20 eyes) with FD and 10 age-matched healthy volunteers (20 eyes) were recruited. All participants were assessed by standardized ophthalmic examinations and the corneal densitometry analysis by Pentacam HR. Densitometry measurements were analyzed in standardized grayscale units.
Results
Seven patients developed conjunctival vessel tortuosity, cornea verticillata appeared in 6 patients, and two patients had Fabry cataract. Retinal vessel tortuosity occurred in 4 patients, and dilation of retinal vessels appeared in 3 patients, all symptoms occurred in both eyes. The first diagnosis of FD up to examination was 4.7 ± 3.23 years, and first ERT up to examination was 2.6 ± 2.27 years. The initial time to diagnosis was negatively related to the corneal densitometry value of the 0–2-mm (r = − 0.556, p = 0.011) and 2–6-mm (r = − 0.482, p = 0.032) zones in the posterior layer. FD group have significantly higher corneal densitometry in anterior 0–2-mm zone and 2–10-mm zone anterior and posterior layer than the control group (p ≤ 0.035, respectively). When divided into two groups by the existence of cornea verticillata, there was a statistically significant difference in the anterior layer, 6–10-mm zone (p = 0.031); in the central layer, 0–2 mm (p = 0.012), 2–6 mm (p = 0.001), 6–10 mm (p = 0.002), and total (p = 0.002); and in the posterior layer, 6–10 mm (p = 0.004) and total (p = 0.002).
Conclusions
FD patients show higher corneal densitometry, and corneal densitometry may have potential for early diagnosis and reminding progress of FD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.