Can bottle design prevent bacterial contamination of nasal irrigation devices?

Sinonasal Irrigation After Endoscopic Sinus surgery - Past to Present and Future

Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is the gold standard treatment for medically refractive chronic rhinosinusitis, aimed at removing diseased tissue and improving natural sinus drainage and aeration. Irrigation of the sinuses has been known to improve sinus mucosal health and is an essential adjunct to surgery. There are a number of methods, devices, and solutions available which are used for nasal irrigation. Neti Pot, squeeze bottle, syringe, rubber bulb and commercially available nasal sprays are some of the simpler used devices used for douching. Electric devices like flosser, Hydropulse and the Navage nasal irrigation systems are available but it's not clear if they provide any advantage over the other methods. We use and propose a gravitational pressure-pulsed device which provides adequate volume and force without the need for external pressure. Salt with sodium bicarbonate is the most used solution base. Hypertonic saline has been described to be more efficacious compared to isotonic saline. Additives such as sodium hypochlorite, antibiotics, corticosteroids, manuka honey and xylitol have proven to be beneficial. Large volume positive pressure irrigations have proven to be beneficial. Optimal position for irrigation varies for low or high-volume irrigation systems. Patient education regarding precautions and disinfection of the device is a must.

Review of evidence supporting the use of nasal corticosteroid irrigation for chronic rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze published reports on the efficacy and safety of CSI in CRS and evaluate the clinical implications of current gaps in evidence. Corticosteroid irrigation (CSI) is commonly used for management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps; however, such use is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

DATA SOURCES

Publications were obtained through PubMed searches through January 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Searches were conducted using 2 terms: "chronic rhinosinusitis" or "nasal polyps" as the first term and "corticosteroid irrigation," "steroid nasal lavage," or "sinus rinse" as the second term. We reviewed relevant, peer-reviewed literature (19 original research [9 controlled, 10 uncontrolled trials], 7 reviews, and 1 meta-analysis) reporting safety and efficacy of CSI in patients with CRS.

RESULTS

Studies were difficult to compare because they used a variety of solution volumes (60 mL to 125 mL per nostril), corticosteroid agents (budesonide, betamethasone, mometasone, or fluticasone), corticosteroid doses, preparation protocols (by compounding pharmacy or by patient), and administration (frequency, time of day, body positioning). It is difficult to determine which parameters might substantially influence clinical effects because studies were generally small, showed marginal benefits, and rarely assessed safety. To date, no studies evaluating CSI have shown statistically significant differences in a type-I error-controlled primary end point over any comparator, possibly owing to small sample sizes.

CONCLUSION

Designing more robust clinical trials may help determine whether CSI is a valid treatment option. Until more evidence supporting CSI use exists, health care professionals should strongly consider choosing FDA-approved therapies for the treatment of CRS.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Nasal Irrigation for Chronic Rhinosinusitis in Adults

The Korean Society of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and Korean Rhinologic Society appointed a guideline development group (GDG) to establish a clinical practice guideline, and the GDG developed a guideline for nasal irrigation for adult patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The guideline focuses on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with nasal irrigation. Nasal irrigation has been recommended as the first-line treatment for CRS in various guidelines, and its clinical effectiveness has been demonstrated through a number of studies with robust evidence. However, no guidelines have presented a consistent nasal irrigation method. Several databases, including OVID Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed, were searched to identify all relevant papers using a predefined search strategy. When insufficient evidence was found, the GDG sought expert opinions and attempted to fill the evidence gap. Evidence-based recommendations for practice were ranked according to the American College of Physicians grading system. The committee developed 11 evidence-based recommendations. This guideline focuses on the evidence-based quality improvement opportunities deemed the most important by the GDG. Moreover, the guideline addresses whether nasal lavage helps treat CRS, what type of rinsing solution should be used, and the effectiveness of using additional medications to increase the therapeutic effect.

A historical review of the evolution of nasal lavage systems

BACKGROUND

Nasal lavage is an ancient practice that still has a fundamental role in the management of sinonasal conditions. The history related to these devices is extensive and remarkable. By reviewing it, it is hoped that a broader view can be achieved on what is currently possible with nasal lavage and how advances may be made in the future.

METHODS

A careful review of different sources, such as ancient manuscripts, registered patents and scientific papers, was conducted to achieve a thorough examination of the history related to nasal rinsing devices.

CONCLUSION

Nasal lavage has evolved significantly since first considered for medical use and has always played a central role in the treatment of patients with sinonasal conditions. Further innovation is still necessary to surmount the shortcomings of current nasal lavage systems.

Identification of microbial contaminants in sinus rinse squeeze bottles used by allergic rhinitis patients

OBJECTIVE

To identify whether irrigation devices become contaminated when used by patients with allergic rhinitis (AR).

METHODS

Ten AR patients with no clinical or endoscopic evidence of active sinonasal infection were given a sinus rinse system and instructed on its proper use, cleaning, and storage. Two squeeze bottles (bottle A and bottle B) were given to each patient for twice-a-day rinsing. Bottle A was used in the morning and analyzed after four weeks. Bottle B was used in the evening and analyzed after 8 weeks of use. Microbial contaminants were cultured from the nose pieces and the inner surface of the bottles obtained from patients.

RESULTS

Seventeen sinus rinse devices (17/20) from all individuals in this study grew bacteria commonly in the nozzles. Twenty-four bacterial isolates consisting of 14 different species were cultured and identified with most common organisms being bacilli and staphylococcus. In addition, no correlation was apparent between the length of bottle use and the degree of contamination (r = 0.13, p = 0.76). During the study period, no patient developed acute sinus infections.

CONCLUSION

Microbial contamination of the sinus rinse system occurs commonly, even in uninfected AR patients; however no evidence exists linking this to clinically relevant sinus infections.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01030146.

Bacterial contamination of saline nasal irrigations in children: An original research

Microbiologic analysis of nasal saline irrigations (NSIs) used in hospitalized children was performed. Of 253 collected samples, 24.9% were positive, and the number of positive samples significantly increased over time (P < .001). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently detected bacterium (28.6%). None of the 118 patients who received NSIs developed a nasosinusal infection. Colonization by cutaneous and environmental germs is frequent and develops early. Hygienic measures should be advocated to reduce contamination.

Identification of Nasal Irrigation Bottle Contamination in Post Sinonasal Surgery

Nasal irrigation is an effective and cheap method in managing post sinonasal surgery patients. It works by improving ciliary clearance and performing mechanical debridement of the thick crust, decreasing mucosal edema and reducing the inflammatory mediators. Presence of nasal irrigation bottle contamination and its effect on patients have been studied. The aim of this study is to prospectively identify the risk of contamination in the nasal irrigation bottle, fluid from the bottle and to correlate with endoscopic findings from the patients who had underwent sinonasal surgery. Swabs will be taken from the nasal irrigation bottle and patient's middle meatus before the surgery and at each post surgery visits (2 and 4 weeks). Patients will be advised to irrigate their nose three times per day post sinonasal surgery. During endoscopic examination of the patient's nasal cavity at 2 and 4 weeks, any evidence of infection will be noted and documented. Additionally, a swab of fluid irrigated from the nasal cavity collected during the clinic follow-ups will also be taken. The specimens will be sent to the Microbiology laboratory for standard culture and sensitivity test. A total of 27 patients completed the study and were divided into case (n = 15) and control (n = 12) groups. The CFU (colony-forming unit) value of the bacteria cultured from the nasal cavity and the nasal irrigation bottle was statistically significantly (P = 0.00) increased from the baseline to the second week follow-up in both groups but not from the second week to the fourth week follow-up. The majority of the swabs from the nasal cavity of the patients and the nasal irrigation bottles were positively cultured for Pseudomonas sp. group. Other groups of bacteria that were cultured were Enterobacter sp., Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus (CONS) and Klebsiella sp. Endoscopically, there was no clinical evidence of infection found in the nasal cavity of the patients. The nasal irrigation bottle that was used in the post sinonasal surgery treatment and for alleviation of symptoms of sinonasal diseases was found to have bacterial contamination from the swabs taken from the bottle. However, despite this finding there was not clinical evidence of infection noted from the nasal endoscopic examination. A simple and effective method of cleaning the bottle would be helpful to reduce the bacterial contamination for this useful treatment method.

Assessing the ideal microwave duration for disinfection of sinus irrigation bottles-A quantitative study

OBJECTIVES

Saline irrigation of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses has a recognised role in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis. However, bacterial recontamination of irrigation bottles through backflow from the sinonasal cavity is a concern in recurrent sinus cavity infections. While patients are encouraged to clean the irrigation bottles regularly, there remains significant concern that the use of contaminated bottles may perpetuate chronic rhinosinusitis. This study assesses the optimal microwave duration to achieve decontamination for each irrigation bottle component part (reservoir, tube and nozzle) using a standard, commercially available microwave. In addition, the irrigation fluid was also tested for contamination after each microwave cycle.

STUDY DESIGN

Laboratory-based experimental study.

PARTICIPANTS

No patients were involved in this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The percentage in vitro decontamination of the bottles' components was determined following 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 seconds of microwave cycles.

RESULTS

Complete decontamination of the bottles was not achieved at any of the tested microwave cycles. Levels of decontamination differed for the different bottle components, and the greatest degree of decontamination for all bottle components occurred at 90 seconds. Although higher levels of decontamination were observed at microwave durations exceeding 90 seconds, this was at the expense of thermal degradation and deformation of the reservoir plastic component of the irrigation bottle. Similarly, lowest contamination of irrigation fluid was observed at 120 seconds.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of establishing precise decontamination procedures and recommends a microwave cycle of 90 seconds for optimal decontamination.

Nasal Irrigation: An Imprecisely Defined Medical Procedure

Nasal irrigation (NI) is an old practice of upper respiratory tract care that likely originated in the Ayurvedic medical tradition. It is used alone or in association with other therapies in several conditions—including chronic rhinosinusitis and allergic rhinitis—and to treat and prevent upper respiratory tract infections, especially in children. However, despite it being largely prescribed in everyday clinical practice, NI is not included or is only briefly mentioned by experts in the guidelines for treatment of upper respiratory tract diseases. In this review, present knowledge about NI and its relevance in clinical practice is discussed to assist physicians in understanding the available evidence and the potential use of this medical intervention. Analysis of the literature showed that NI seems to be effective in the treatment of several acute and chronic sinonasal conditions. However, although in recent years several new studies have been performed, most of the studies that have evaluated NI have relevant methodologic problems. Only multicenter studies enrolling a great number of subjects can solve the problem of the real relevance of NI, and these studies are urgently needed. Methods for performing NI have to be standardized to determine which solutions, devices and durations of treatment are adequate to obtain favorable results. This seems particularly important for children that suffer a great number of sinonasal problems and might benefit significantly from an inexpensive and simple preventive and therapeutic measure such as NI.

Decreasing bacterial cross-contamination with a pulsating nasal irrigation device

BACKGROUND

The use of nasal irrigation in the management of postoperative endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) patients is commonplace; however, the potential contamination of these bottles is concerning. The Sinugator® cordless pulsating nasal wash (NeilMed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Santa Rosa, CA) is a battery-operated, positive pressure, pulsatile pump with a unidirectional flow. The principal aim of this study was to determine the incidence of cross-contamination using the pulsating nasal irrigation device and compare it with the traditional squeeze bottle.

METHODS

Eleven post-ESS patients were given a NeilMed Sinugator nasal wash to use 3 times per day. A sterile nasal swab was obtained at the initial and second postoperative visits. A swab of the plastic irrigation reservoir was collected at the second visit.

RESULTS

The overall contamination rate of bottles was found to be 45%. During the study several different organisms were cultured in the nose and bottles. The most commonly isolated organisms were coliforms and Staphylococcus aureus. We did not observe concomitant organisms in the nasal cultures and bottles in any subject.

CONCLUSION

Despite using a motorized irrigation device, patients and their bottles grew positive cultures. However, no cross-contamination between the patients and bottles was identified, which can be attributed to a design that minimizes backwash.

Is nasal steroid spray bottle contamination a potential issue in chronic rhinosinusitis?

BACKGROUND

Intranasal steroids are the first line of treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis. Although contamination of adjunctive devices (e.g. irrigation bottles) has been much investigated, little is known about nasal contamination of the metered-dose spray bottles used to deliver intranasal steroids, and the potential influence on disease chronicity.

METHODS

Twenty-five prospectively recruited patients with stable chronic rhinosinusitis underwent microbiological analysis of their nasal vestibule and middle meatus and also of their steroid bottle tip and contents. Additionally, bottle tips were inoculated in vitro with Staphylococcus aureus and various sterilisation techniques tested.

RESULTS

For 18 of the 25 (72 per cent) patients, both nasal and bottle tip swabs grew either Staphylococcus aureus or coagulase-negative staphylococci. Staphylococcus aureus was cultured from 7 of the 25 (28 per cent) patients, and 5 of these 7 had concomitant bacterial growth from both nose and steroid bottle. Thus, the cross-contamination rate was 71 per cent for Staphylococcus aureus infected patients and 20 per cent overall. Sterilisation was effective with boiling water, ethanol wipes and microwaving, but not with cold water or dishwashing liquid.

CONCLUSION

Nasal steroid spray bottle tips can become contaminated with sinonasal cavity bacteria. Simple sterilisation methods can eliminate this contamination. Patient education on this matter should be emphasised.

Nasal saline irrigations for the symptoms of acute and chronic rhinosinusitis

The use of saline nasal irrigation (SNI) in the treatment of nasal and sinus disorders has its roots in the yoga tradition and homeopathic medicine. In recent years, SNI has been increasingly observed as concomitant therapy for acute (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Various devices are employed, such as nasal douches, neti pots or sprays. The saline solutions used vary in composition and concentration. This article gives a current overview of literature on the clinical efficacy of SNI in the treatment of ARS and CRS. It then answers frequent questions that arise in daily clinical routine (nasal spray vs. nasal irrigation, saline solution composition and concentration, possible risks for patients). SNI has been an established option in CRS treatment for many years. All large medical associations and the authors of systematic reviews consistently conclude that SNI is a useful addition for treating CRS symptoms. SNI use in ARS therapy, however, is controversial. The results of systematic reviews and medical associations' recommendations show the existing but limited efficacy of SNI in ARS. For clinical practice, nasal douches are recommended-whatever the form of rhinosinusitis-along with isotonic and hypertonic saline solutions in CRS (in ARS to a limited extent). To prevent infections, it is essential to clean the nasal douche thoroughly and use the proper salt concentration (2-3.5 %). Conclusive proof of the efficacy of SNI in the treatment of ARS is still pending. In CRS, SNI is one of the cornerstones of treatment.