Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to assess disparities in nasal nitric oxide (NO) levels between individuals diagnosed with eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (ECRS) and those without ECRS. The second aim was to ascertain the comparative predictive efficacy of these nasal NO levels for the presence of ECRS.
METHODS: A systematic analysis was conducted on relevant studies that compared nasal NO levels in individuals with ECRS and those without. Furthermore, the discriminatory capacity of nasal NO in distinguishing ECRS from non-ECRS cohorts was quantified. The risk of bias across studies was evaluated utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
RESULTS: The comprehensive review encompassed a total of 5 studies involving 470 participants. Findings revealed that patients diagnosed with ECRS exhibited significantly higher levels of nasal NO, as measured in parts per billion (ppb), compared to their non-ECRS patients. The mean difference was 130.03 ppb (95% confidence interval: [66.30, 193.75], I2 = 58.7%). The diagnostic odds ratio for nasal NO in identifying ECRS was 9.29 ([5.85, 14.75], I2 = 26.4%). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.82. The correlation between sensitivity and false positive rate was 0.53, suggesting a lack of heterogeneity. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were 69% ([0.55, 0.79], I2 = 77.0%), 83% ([0.73, 0.90], I2 = 68.5%), 77% ([0.69, 0.83], I2 = 50.1%), and 75% ([0.67, 0.82], I2 = 41.5%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Nasal NO has the potential as a noninvasive diagnostic measure and endotype tool for ECRS.
METHODS: A systematic analysis was conducted on relevant studies that compared nasal NO levels in individuals with ECRS and those without. Furthermore, the discriminatory capacity of nasal NO in distinguishing ECRS from non-ECRS cohorts was quantified. The risk of bias across studies was evaluated utilizing the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
RESULTS: The comprehensive review encompassed a total of 5 studies involving 470 participants. Findings revealed that patients diagnosed with ECRS exhibited significantly higher levels of nasal NO, as measured in parts per billion (ppb), compared to their non-ECRS patients. The mean difference was 130.03 ppb (95% confidence interval: [66.30, 193.75], I2 = 58.7%). The diagnostic odds ratio for nasal NO in identifying ECRS was 9.29 ([5.85, 14.75], I2 = 26.4%). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.82. The correlation between sensitivity and false positive rate was 0.53, suggesting a lack of heterogeneity. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were 69% ([0.55, 0.79], I2 = 77.0%), 83% ([0.73, 0.90], I2 = 68.5%), 77% ([0.69, 0.83], I2 = 50.1%), and 75% ([0.67, 0.82], I2 = 41.5%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Nasal NO has the potential as a noninvasive diagnostic measure and endotype tool for ECRS.
摘要：
目的：本研究的主要目的是评估诊断为嗜酸性粒细胞慢性鼻-鼻窦炎（ECRS）的个体与无ECRS的个体之间鼻腔一氧化氮（NO）水平的差异。第二个目的是确定这些鼻NO水平对ECRS存在的比较预测功效。
方法：对相关研究进行了系统分析，比较了ECRS患者和无ECRS患者的鼻NO水平。此外，我们量化了鼻NO在区分ECRS和非ECRS队列时的辨别能力.使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估了所有研究的偏倚风险。
结果：综合综述共包括5项研究，涉及470名参与者。研究结果表明，诊断为ECRS的患者表现出明显较高的鼻NO水平，以十亿分之一(ppb)衡量，与非ECRS患者相比。平均差为130.03ppb(95%置信区间：[66.30，193.75]，I2=58.7%）。鼻NO在识别ECRS中的诊断优势比为9.29（[5.85，14.75]，I2=26.4%）。总接受者工作特征曲线下面积为0.82。敏感性和假阳性率之间的相关性为0.53，表明缺乏异质性。灵敏度,特异性，负预测值，阳性预测值为69%([0.55，0.79]，I2=77.0%)，83%（[0.73，0.90]，I2=68.5%)，77%([0.69，0.83]，I2=50.1%)，和75%([0.67，0.82]，I2=41.5%)，分别。
结论：鼻NO具有作为ECRS的非侵入性诊断措施和内型工具的潜力。
方法：对相关研究进行了系统分析，比较了ECRS患者和无ECRS患者的鼻NO水平。此外，我们量化了鼻NO在区分ECRS和非ECRS队列时的辨别能力.使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估了所有研究的偏倚风险。
结果：综合综述共包括5项研究，涉及470名参与者。研究结果表明，诊断为ECRS的患者表现出明显较高的鼻NO水平，以十亿分之一(ppb)衡量，与非ECRS患者相比。平均差为130.03ppb(95%置信区间：[66.30，193.75]，I2=58.7%）。鼻NO在识别ECRS中的诊断优势比为9.29（[5.85，14.75]，I2=26.4%）。总接受者工作特征曲线下面积为0.82。敏感性和假阳性率之间的相关性为0.53，表明缺乏异质性。灵敏度,特异性，负预测值，阳性预测值为69%([0.55，0.79]，I2=77.0%)，83%（[0.73，0.90]，I2=68.5%)，77%([0.69，0.83]，I2=50.1%)，和75%([0.67，0.82]，I2=41.5%)，分别。
结论：鼻NO具有作为ECRS的非侵入性诊断措施和内型工具的潜力。
