Background: The need for pathologic examination of all tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy (T&A) specimens is controversial. Microscopic pathologic examination of these specimens is costly, but neglecting this step may miss diagnoses of significant diseases, especially malignancies. This study was designed to determine the rate of unexpected malignancies among patients who underwent T&A.Methods: All patients who underwent T&A at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences between February 2004 and February 2008 were included in a prospective study. Gross and microscopic pathologic examinations were done on all the specimens. The charts of the patients with significant pathological finding were reviewed. Information about pre-operative signs, symptoms, and risk factors were used to verify unexpected pathologic findings.Results: A total of 5058 patients were included. The age distribution was 10 months to 92 years (mean 14.0 years). There were 2498 males (49.4) and 2560 females (50.6%). Significant pathological findings were detected in 54 patients (1%). One unexpected malignancy (0.019%) was found in an adult patient. No unexpected malignancies were found in pediatric patients.Conclusions: All T&A specimens in the adult population should be sent for microscopic pathological examination. Also specimens of nonroutine T&A in children (with positive findings in the medical history or on physical examination) should be sent for microscopic pathological examination. In children without positive findings in their history or on physical examination, gross pathological evaluation of routine T&A specimens by a pathologist is sufficient. Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Allergic rhinitis is an extremely common disease worldwide. Aeroallergens are very often involved in allergic rhinitis and their prevalence may vary in different regions. The causative allergens of allergic rhinitis in our area are unknown.The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of skin reactivity to different aeroallergens in patients with allergic rhinitis in the city of Shiraz, Iran.A total of 212 patients who were referred to Motahari Allergy Clinic with chronic rhinitis were subjected to skin prick test (SPT) with a series of common allergenic extracts including grasses, weeds, trees, house dust mites and moulds. One hundred and thirty two subjects (62.2%) had positive SPT to at least one aeroallergen. Male to female ratio was 1.2 and mean age was 18.2 years. The prevalence rates for allergen groups were: pollens (92.4%), mites (22.7%) and moulds (8.3%). Among 122 patients reactive to pollens, 92 (75.4%) showed skin reactivity to weeds, 78 (63.9%) to grasses and 68 (55.7%) to trees. Polysensitization was common, with 75.7% of all sensitized patients being positive to more than one aeroallergen.Pollens are the main sensitizing allergens among patients with allergic rhinitis in Shiraz. This pattern of prevalence was expected based on herbal geography, climate and also found to be compatible with the results from studies carried out in places with the same habitat.

Otolaryngology–Head and Neck SurgeryVolume 129, Issue 3 p. 293-294 Case Reports Long Lasting Nasopharyngeal Foreign Body Fardin Eghtedari MD, Corresponding Author Fardin Eghtedari MD [email protected] Department of Otolaryngology, Khalili Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IranReprint requets: Fardin Eghtedari, MD, 253, Lane 22, Eram St., Shiraz, 71437 Iran; e-mail, [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Fardin Eghtedari MD, Corresponding Author Fardin Eghtedari MD [email protected] Department of Otolaryngology, Khalili Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IranReprint requets: Fardin Eghtedari, MD, 253, Lane 22, Eram St., Shiraz, 71437 Iran; e-mail, [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 21 November 2016 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(03)00471-6Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. Volume129, Issue3September 2003Pages 293-294 RelatedInformation