Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fungal rhinosinusitis (FRS) cases are not exiguous for the world. However, their spike as a postCOVID sequelae has alarmed the world, especially India. Adding to the woes is the high mortality rate and poor prognosis associated with acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis (AIFR) in such immunocompromised patients. In such a scenario, early and precise diagnosis of AIFR is what a patient and physician banks upon. KOH and histopathology are the two frontline investigations for the diagnosis of FRS. Our study aimed at analyzing the cases of FRS by histopathology and comparing these with KOH. STUDY DESIGN AND MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective longitudinal study including suspected postCOVID FRS patients over a period of 1.5 months. Their clinical, histopathological, and KOH findings were then correlated. RESULTS: About 72.5% clinically suspected fungal infection specimens were found to be positive for fungal elements on histopathology. Of these, only 30 cases were positive by KOH mount. Maximum patients belonged to 40-70 years of age; males (67%) more than females. Sites involved were paranasal sinuses (100%), nasal (88%), and orbital (25%). Histopathology revealed mucormycosis (100%) and aspergillosis (16%). Angioinvasion was identified in 38% of the mucormycosis cases. CONCLUSION: In a state of crisis, when the gold standard for fungal identification i.e., culture can take as many as 21 days for final report and early and judicious antifungal treatment is sine qua non of recovery, histopathology has proved to be better than KOH as far as early and precise diagnosis of fungal elements and their invasion is concerned.