Get access

Spectrum of fungal rhinosinusitis; histopathologist’s perspective

Authors


Dr A Bal, Assistant Professor, Department of Histopathology, PGIMER, Chandigarh 160012, India.
e-mail: docaman5@hotmail.com

Abstract

Aims:  Clinical presentation can provide a clue to the subcategories of fungal rhinosinusitis (FRS); however, tissue examination provides accurate classification. The aim was to analyse the incidence and histopathological spectrum of FRS.

Methods and results:  A retrospective analysis of all the cases of rhinosinusitis reported in the last 5 years was carried out. Haematoxylin and eosin-stained sections along with special stains such as periodic acid–Schiff and Grocott’s were examined. These cases were subclassified based on the presence of allergic mucin, mycelial elements and tissue reaction. Out of a total of 665 cases of rhinosinusitis, 284 (42.7%) were of FRS. On histopathological examination they were broadly categorized as: (i) non-invasive FRS (n = 171, 60.2%), which included 160 cases (56.3%) of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) and eleven (3.9%) of fungal ball; (ii) invasive FRS (n = 101, 35.6%), which included 48 cases (16.9%) of chronic invasive granulomatous FRS, four (1.4%) of chronic invasive FRS and 49 (17.3%) of acute fulminant FRS; and (iii) mixed pattern FRS, comprising 12 cases (4.25%).

Conclusions:  AFRS is the most common type of FRS. Cases with mixed reaction pattern suggest that different types of FRS represent a progressive spectrum of disease. An exact histopathological categorization of FRS is important as regards treatment.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary