Effective dose range of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of acute rhinosinusitis

[Problems of polypragmasia and drug interaction in the treatment of uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis]

This publication discusses polypragmasia and drug interactions in the treatment of uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis in children and adults. Treatment of rhinosinusitis on an outpatient basis in multimorbid patients may be accompanied by multiple prescriptions, which increases the risk of drug interactions. The article reflects the most significant inappropriate combinations of both medicines and biologically active additives, herbal preparations. The advantages of using drugs with proven effectiveness, in particular intranasal glucocorticosteroids, are considered.

[The evolution of methods of active irrigation of paranasal sinuses in rhinosinusitis. Part 2]

Inflammation of the paranasal sinuses significantly reduces the quality of life of people and causes marked economic damage to society. The striking clinical picture of sinusitis has always forced doctors to study the disease, as evidenced by the first records of the anatomy and diseases of the paranasal sinuses by doctors in ancient Egypt more than 3.000 years BC. Sinusitis has been treated in different ways in different historical periods. Effective medication treatment appeared relatively recently and began to steadily replace the older instrumental methods, to which many people had a preconceived notion of invasiveness. However, many studies are showing the positive effect of active drainage methods and, moreover, there is data showing that the discomfort during such procedures is slightly higher than during dental treatment under local anesthesia. This article presents a review of the available scientific literature on the use of different treatments for bacterial rhinosinusitis at different historical stages, ranging from the first publications on puncture techniques to balloon dilatation and the modern approach to conservative treatment.

Adverse Events Associated with Intranasal Sprays: An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Database and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Intranasal sprays (INSs) are commonly used medications for the treatment of many rhinologic conditions. Despite their popularity, an analysis of a nationwide reporting database and comparison to the available literature has never been performed.

METHODS

The Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database was accessed to obtain adverse event (AE) records from 2014 to 2019 for varying INSs, including: 10 corticosteroids, 1 alpha adrenergic, and 3 antihistamines. The Proportional Reporting Ratios (PRR) and Reporting Odds Ratios (ROR) were calculated for dyspnea, anosmia, ageusia/dysgeusia, epistaxis, and headache. A PRR ≥ 2 or ROR ≥ 1 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Corticosteroids had 98 864 total reported AEs to the database, followed by antihistamines (7011) and alpha adrenergics (2071). In total, dyspnea was reported 5843 times, followed by headache (4230), epistaxis (1205), ageusia/dysgeusia (920), and anosmia (312). Overall, PRR and ROR values for dyspnea ranged from 0.51 to 4.25 and 0.51 to 4.49; for dysgeusia/ageusia from 0.56 to 6.09 and 0.56 to 6.12; and for epistaxis from 1.03 to 27.24 and 1.03 to 30.76, respectively. All medications which listed anosmia within the top AEs had PRR and ROR values exceeding 2 and 1, respectively. The PRR for headache exceeded 2 for 1 medication and the ROR exceeded 1 in 7 medications.

CONCLUSION

The AEs of dyspnea, anosmia, ageusia/dysgeusia, epistaxis, and headache are reported within the FAERS database for commonly prescribed INSs. When compared against the existing scientific literature, the clinical significance of this reporting tool from the FDA for these classes of medications remains unvalidated.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021

I.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR-RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR-RS-2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence-based findings of the document.

METHODS

ICAR-RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence-based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence-based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary.

RESULTS

ICAR-RS-2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence-based management algorithm is provided.

CONCLUSION

This ICAR-RS-2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence-based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

Evidence-based management of acute rhinosinusitis with herbal products

Background

The overuse of antibiotics for unjustified indications such as the management of acute uncomplicated rhinosinusitis has contributed to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria and prompted the need for alternative treatments. This review assesses the quality of evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis with herbal products, with the goal of positioning them among other treatments and identifying future research directions. The MEDLINE database was searched for randomized controlled trials with Sinupret®, Pelargonium sidoides extract, Cyclamen europaeum (CE), cineole, and GeloMyrtol®. Searches with N-acetylcysteine and mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) were performed to compare the strength of evidence of herbal products to these conventional products, which are indicated for acute rhinosinusitis.

Main body

Evidence was strongest for Sinupret, followed by Pelargonium sidoides extract. Their use in acute rhinosinusitis is supported by randomized placebo-controlled trials demonstrating both clinical efficacy and safety. Comparative data with conventional treatments such as topical glucocorticosteroids were found only for Sinupret and suggested comparable efficacy in a small study.

For other herbal products, the overall level of evidence was low. The search retrieved two small-scale placebo-controlled randomized studies with CE nasal spray. The two trials were not powered to draw conclusions about the safety and efficacy of CE nasal spray and reported a lack of efficacy with CE on symptom reduction. Only one randomized placebo-controlled trial was identified for GeloMyrtol and cineole. These suggested an improvement in acute rhinosinusitis symptoms with both products, but the results warrant replication in larger trials.

Studies directly comparing herbal products are scarce; one randomized trial has compared cineole with Sinupret, but the results need confirmation in further studies.

Studies with N-acetylcysteine are limited to small-scale clinical trials, while MFNS is supported by a strength of evidence comparable to Sinupret in this indication.

Conclusion

State-of-the-art studies demonstrating the efficacy and safety of herbal products for the management of acute rhinosinusitis are available. Given that the evidence for Sinupret is the strongest and comparable to that of a widely available topical corticosteroid, MFNS, Sinupret may be considered for the management of acute uncomplicated rhinosinusitis.

Intranasal Corticosteroid Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Reported Safety and Adverse Effects in Adults

Objectives

To address concerns related to the safety profile of both Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved and non–FDA-approved intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) use in the adult population.

Data Source

Systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE databases using a comprehensive search strategy including all INCS formulations and adverse events. The study design was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additional sources were identified from study references of relevant articles.

Review Methods

A structured literature search was conducted. Each study was graded for level of evidence using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Extracted data included population size, study design, drug (dosage, route, and frequency), presence of hypothalamus pituitary axis suppression, ocular symptoms, and treatment-related adverse events.

Results

A total of 60 studies met inclusion criteria. The studies included use of INCS as metered nasal sprays, drops, injections, aerosols, and irrigations. There were no persistent abnormalities in cortisol level or intraocular pressure change. Meta-analysis of epistaxis showed a significantly increased risk in the FDA-approved treatment group in comparison with control (risk ratio 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-2.14; P = .007).

Conclusions

Overall, it appears that the use of both FDA and published non-FDA application of INCS are safe in the adult population. Meta-analysis demonstrated an increased risk of epistaxis in patients using INCS compared with placebo. Otherwise, there was no significant difference between in adults in the treatment group and placebo group. As an important caveat, the interpretation of safety of nonstandard INCS is restricted to delivery methods and dosages published in the literature.

Risks and management of long-term corticosteroid use in chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the use and risks of long-term corticosteroids in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Long-term use of systemic corticosteroids is not indicated in the management of CRS due to the associated side effects and potential complications. Therefore, recent research has focused on the safety and efficacy of topical corticosteroid, particularly second-generation corticosteroids, and their modes of administration. Second-generation corticosteroids are more potent and have less systemic bioavailability than their first-generation counterparts. However, caution must be taken with concomitant use of more than two types of corticosteroids (topical, systemic, inhaled etc.) and also with their dosage and frequency of administration to avoid adrenal suppression, growth suppression in children, elevated intraocular pressure or epistaxis. Research is ongoing into therapies that may reduce corticosteroid resistance which has been demonstrated in some nasal polyps.

SUMMARY

Corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of CRS; however, use must be tailored to the patient-specific disease and requires ongoing review and regular reevaluation by their physician.

Update on Intranasal Medications in Rhinosinusitis

This review describes beneficial effects and adverse events of various intranasal medications in treating rhinosinusitis. Application of intranasal steroids has been described in treating all subtypes of adult rhinosinusitis, but reports are limited in pediatrics and mostly in acute pediatric subgroups resulted in benefits While saline irrigation is effective for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps and in pediatric acute rhinosinusitis, there is no evidence yet for saline drips and sprays. Application of intranasal antifungals and nasal irrigation with surfactant brings more harm than benefits. There is no evidence supporting the use of intranasal antibiotics. We also review influence of devices, methods, and patient head position on nasal and paranasal sinus drug delivery.

Associations Between Systemic and Local Corticosteroid Use With Metabolic Syndrome and Body Mass Index

CONTEXT

Use of systemic corticosteroids (CSs) may induce adverse cardiometabolic alterations, potentially leading to obesity and metabolic syndrome (MetS). Although evidence is accumulating that local CSs have considerable systemic effects, their effects on cardiometabolic factors in the general population remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between overall CS use and specific CS types with MetS, body mass index (BMI), and other cardiometabolic traits.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional cohort study.

SETTING

General population from the northern Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 140,879 adult participants in the population-based Lifelines Cohort Study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

BMI, waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting metabolic serum parameters, and a comprehensive set of potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

In women, overall, systemic, and local CS use was associated with higher odds of having MetS. Among local female users, only nasal (odds ratio [OR], 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06 to 1.36]) and inhaled CSs [OR, 1.35 (95% CI, 1.24 to 1.49)] users were more likely to have MetS. In men, no association was found between overall and specific CS use and presence of MetS. Use of local-only CSs in women, specifically inhaled CSs in both sexes, was associated with higher BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of local CSs, particularly inhaled types, as well as systemic CSs, was associated with higher likelihood of having MetS, higher BMI, and other adverse cardiometabolic traits, especially among women. Because the inhaled agents are the main group of prescribed CSs, this might be a substantial risk to public health in case of a yet-to-be-proven causal relationship.

Evaluation of a steroid releasing sinus implant for the treatment of patients undergoing frontal sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis

INTRODUCTION

Management of the frontal sinus places great demands on the otolaryngologist. Given that the fronto-ethmoidal region is susceptible to recurrent inflammation, scarring, and stenosis, maintaining long-term patency of the frontal sinus is a difficult challenge. Oral and topical anti-inflammatory therapy, post-operative stenting, and 'home-brew' drug elution have been used for the treatment of the frontal sinus with mixed success. Recently an implant has been approved for post-operative placement into the frontal recess. This implant provides reliable and consistent steroid drug elution to address inflammation of the frontal recess secondary to chronic sinusitis. Areas covered: This review discusses the development and application of steroid eluting implants in the postoperative care of patients with chronic frontal sinusitis. All randomized controlled trials evaluating steroid eluting implants are discussed. Relevant supporting material discussing background, economics, safety are included. Expert commentary: Steroid eluting implants fulfill a unique niche in the treatment following frontal sinus surgery. They are shown to decrease the need for post-operative interventions and improve outcomes in patients with chronic sinusitis. There is significant potential for growth in the use of steroid eluting implants.

Evidence and evidence gaps in therapies of nasal obstruction and rhinosinusitis

Therapeutic decisions in otorhinolaryngology are based on clinical experience, surgical skills, and scientific evidence. Recently, evidence-based therapies have gained increased attention and importance due to their potential to improve the individual patient's treatment and their potential at the same time to reduce treatment costs. In clinical practice, it is almost impossible to stay ahead of the increasing mass of literature and on the other hand critically assess the presented data. A solid scientific and statistical knowledge as well as a significant amount of spare time are required to detect systematic bias and other errors in study designs, also with respect to assessing whether or not a study should be part of an individual therapeutic decision. Meta-analyses, reviews, and clinical guidelines are, therefore, of increasing importance for evidence-based therapy in clinical practice. This review is an update of the availability of external evidence for the treatment of nasal obstruction and rhinosinusitis. It becomes evident that both groups of diseases differ significantly in the availability of external evidence. Furthermore, it becomes obvious that surgical treatment options are normally based on evidence of significantly lower quality than medical treatment options.

Comparative study of the efficacy of topical steroid and antibiotic combination therapy versus oral antibiotic alone when treating acute rhinosinusitis

Background:

Acute rhinosinusitis arises as a consequence of viral rhinitis, and bacterial infection can subsequently occur. Intranasal antibiotics as an adjunct to corticosteroids usually demonstrate the greatest symptom relief.

Aim:

We wanted to clinically evaluate the effects of a topical antibiotic and steroid combination administered intranasally, versus an oral antibiotic alone when treating acute rhinosinusitis.

Method:

Forty patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis were divided into two groups. Group A received an antibiotic and steroid combination (ofloxacin 0.26 per cent and dexamethasone 0.053 per cent nasal drops) for 10 days, administered intranasally (5 drops in each nostril/8 hours). Group B, the control group, received an oral antibiotic alone (amoxicillin 90 mg/kg).

Results:

Eight hours after commencing treatment, facial pain was more severe in group B and nasal obstruction was reduced in both groups. Ten days after commencing treatment, anterior nasal discharge was 0.15 per cent in group A and absent in group B.

Conclusion:

The application of a topical antibiotic and steroid combination into the nasal cavity is an effective way of treating uncomplicated, acute bacterial rhinosinusitis with the theoretical advantages of easy administration, high local drug concentration and minimal systemic adverse effects.

A prospective randomized blinded clinical trial: large-volume nasal irrigation with fluticasone propionate in the early postoperative period following septoplasty

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare 2 methods of nasal irrigation after septoplasty. The combined use of low-pressure, high-volume nasal saline (LPHVNS) irrigation, together with fluticasone propionate (FP) (LPHVNS+FP), was compared with high-pressure, low-volume nasal saline (HPLVNS) irrigation during the early postoperative period following septoplasty.

METHODS

Seventy-three patients undergoing septoplasty for nasal obstruction were recruited for the study. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups; nasal irrigation was applied for 4 weeks in both groups. Group 1 (n = 40) used HPLVNS irrigation. Group 2 (n = 33) used the LPHVNS+FP combination. The patients were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), nasal examination scores, acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and peak nasal inspiratory flowmetry (PNIF) measurements.

RESULTS

In group 2, the increase in VAS results was more prominent than in group 1. NOSE scores were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1. The nasal examination revealed that group 2 had less edema and less crusting than group 1. The decrease in nasal airway resistance was significantly higher in group 2. The PNIF values increased to a significantly greater extent in group 2 than in group 1.

CONCLUSION

Nasal irrigation with the LPHVNS+FP combination during the early postoperative period following septoplasty is an effective method, resulting not only in increased patient satisfaction and nasal air flow but also in decreased edema and crust formation.

Riniti e rinosinusiti acute dell’adulto

Le riniti e le rinosinusiti acute sono delle patologie frequenti e benigne nella maggior parte dei casi. La loro diagnosi è, prima di tutto, clinica. La difficoltà del loro trattamento è la differenziazione delle forme virali, più frequenti e banali, e delle forme batteriche, rare ma potenzialmente gravi. Le recenti raccomandazioni sono riassunte in questa esposizione. Analizzando le prove scientifiche del momento, esse insistono sui criteri diagnostici clinici, sulle indicazioni degli esami complementari, sull’efficacia dei vari trattamenti e sull’importanza dell’informazione e dell’educazione dei pazienti. I futuri lavori in questo settore dovranno permettere di selezionare in modo più preciso i pazienti che richiedono realmente una terapia antibiotica e di evitare, così, importanti spese sanitarie nonché la comparsa di ceppi batterici resistenti.

Rinitis y rinosinusitis agudas del adulto

Las rinitis y rinosinusitis agudas son afecciones frecuentes y benignas en la mayoría de los casos. Su diagnóstico es esencialmente clínico. La dificultad de su tratamiento consiste en diferenciar las formas víricas, más frecuentes y banales, de las formas bacterianas, que son infrecuentes pero potencialmente graves. En este artículo se resumen las recomendaciones recientes, que se basan en la evidencia actual e insisten en los criterios diagnósticos clínicos, las indicaciones de las pruebas complementarias, la eficacia de los distintos tratamientos, así como la importancia de la información y de la educación de los pacientes. Los futuros trabajos en este ámbito deberán permitir seleccionar con más precisión a los pacientes que requieren realmente una antibioticoterapia y evitar de ese modo unos gastos sanitarios considerables, así como la aparición de cepas bacterianas resistentes.

Decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation for acute sinusitis in children

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation in children with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines or nasal irrigation in improving symptoms of acute sinusitis in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1950 to June week 1, 2014) and EMBASE (1950 to June 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, which evaluated children younger than 18 years of age with acute sinusitis, defined as 10 to 30 days of rhinorrhea, congestion or daytime cough. We excluded trials of children with chronic sinusitis and allergic rhinitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed each study for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 662 studies identified through the electronic searches and handsearching, none met all the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to determine whether the use of antihistamines, decongestants or nasal irrigation is efficacious in children with acute sinusitis. Further research is needed to determine whether these interventions are beneficial in the treatment of children with acute sinusitis.

The use of large volume low pressure nasal saline with fluticasone propionate for the treatment of pediatric acute rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVES

Fluticasone propionate and nasal saline irrigation have been used in the treatment of sinonasal diseases for a long time. Our study investigates the effect of the combination of large volume low pressure nasal saline irrigation and fluticasone propionate for the treatment of pediatric acute rhinosinusitis.

METHODS

Ninety-one pediatric patients with acute rhinosinusitis were included in our study. The patients were randomized into two groups. The first group (n=45) was treated with standard therapy (antibiotherapy+nasal decongestant) for 2 weeks, the second group was treated with the large volume low pressure nasal saline+fluticasone propionate combination for 3 weeks. The clinical scores, radiologic evaluations (X-ray Waters view), peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) measurements, total symptom scores and hematologic parameters (WBC, CRP, ESR) of the patients were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in between the two groups regarding age, gender, height and weight. Even though the clinical scores of Group 2 improved more rapidly, there were no significant differences in between groups regarding clinical scores by the 21st day. There were no significant differences in post treatment radiologic evaluations (Waters graphy). Both groups had significant improvement of their post treatment PNIF values, yet the improvement was more marked in Group 2 than in Group 1. The rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, throat itching and cough symptoms improved more rapidly in Group 2 than in Group 1. Post-treatment nose itching and sneezing symptoms were significantly less in Group 2. The values of hematologic parameters were significantly reduced at the end of the 3rd week in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is a first in investigating the combined use of large volume low pressure nasal saline and fluticasone propionate in acute pediatric rhinosinusitis, and the results reveal that the combination therapy was effective. Low pressure large volume nasal saline+fluticasone propionate combination can be employed as a new line of therapy for the treatment of pediatric acute rhinosinusitis, either by itself or combined with standard therapy.

Intranasal glucocorticosteroids - not only in allergic rhinitis In the 40th anniversary of intranasal glucocorticosteroids' introduction

It has been 40 years since Niels Mygind's publication in British Medical Journal on intranasal application of beclomethasone dipropionate aerosol in allergic rhinitis (AR). Since then a new era in treatment of allergic and nonallergic upper airway diseases began. This publication presents current concepts on application of intranasal glucocorticosteroids (inGCS) in treatment of upper airway diseases and in particular of AR and rhinosinusitis. Nonquestionable advantage of inGCS is their strong anti-inflammatory local action with little impact on general health responsible for few and benign side effects. Main way of action of glucocorticosteroids is connected with binding to the intracellular glucocorticosteroid receptor and its impact on nuclear cytoplasmic transcriptional factors. Glucocorticosteroids suppress gene expression of factors responsible for generating and supporting inflammatory processes, proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines production, and adhesive molecules expression. It appears that glucocorticosteroids have also other mechanisms of action, non-involving intracellular receptors, leading to inhibition of early and late phase of allergic reaction. At the moment the following glucocorticosteroids are registered in Poland: beclomethasone, budesonide, fluticasone propionate, fluticasone furoate, and mometasone furoate. Furoates earn special attention as their lateral furoate ester chain makes the molecules highly lipophilic, and hence easily absorbed by nasal mucous membranes, epithelium and cell membrane phospholipids. This minimizes their general action and maximizes local action. According to current state of knowledge topical glucocorticosteroids are used in the following upper airway diseases with different inflammatory mechanisms: AR, non-AR, particularly NARES, acute rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with and without nasal polyps, adenoid hypertrophy and rhinitis in bronchial asthma.

The safety and efficacy of short-term budesonide delivered via mucosal atomization device for chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Budesonide is a potent corticosteroid commonly prescribed for management of inflammation in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The standard for prescribing budesonide is via impregnated nasal saline irrigation (INSI), although recently the mucosal atomization device (MAD) has emerged as a theoretically superior method of distributing medication into the sinuses. The MAD atomizes medication into small droplets and this is thought to enhance absorption and improve bioavailability. However, no studies have shown whether enhanced absorption and improved bioavailability of budesonide via MAD causes adrenal suppression. The objective of this study is to determine whether budesonide via MAD affects the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis.

METHODS

Twenty CRS patients were recruited from a tertiary rhinology clinic and randomized to take budesonide (1 mg) via MAD or via INSI twice a day for 60 days. The adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation test and 22-item Sinonasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-22) questionnaire were administered on days 1, 30, and 60 of the study. Plasma budesonide and cortisol levels were simultaneously quantified using a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry technique.

RESULTS

There was no indication of adrenal suppression in either group (n = 20) based on ACTH stimulation test results nor was there significant plasma budesonide levels detected in either group. Quality of life, as indicated by SNOT-22, did not differ between groups at 60 days (p = 0.404; 95% confidence interval [CI], -37.2 to 15.9), but SNOT-22 scores for patients using MAD did show statistically significant improvement at 60 days compared to baseline (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The MAD is likely a safe and effective method of delivering budesonide to the sinuses in the short term.

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis

BACKGROUND

Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are effective in relieving symptoms of acute sinusitis in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 4, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1990 to May 2013) and bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing INCS treatment to placebo or no intervention in adults and children with acute sinusitis. Acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by radiological evidence or by nasal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with either resolution or improvement of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were any adverse events that required discontinuation of treatment, drop-outs before the end of the study, rates of relapse, complications and return to school or work.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

No new trials were found for inclusion in this update. Four studies involving 1943 participants with acute sinusitis met our inclusion criteria. The trials were well-designed and double-blind and studied INCS versus placebo or no intervention for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow-up were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When we combined the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis, participants receiving INCS were more likely to experience resolution or improvement in symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement of symptoms or complete relief: for mometasone furoate 400 µg versus 200 µg (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18 versus RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.11). No significant adverse events were reported and there was no significant difference in the drop-out and recurrence rates for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is limited for acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy but supports the use of INCS as a monotherapy or as an adjuvant therapy to antibiotics. Clinicians should weigh the modest but clinically important benefits against possible minor adverse events when prescribing therapy.

Clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and management of acute bacterial sinusitis in children aged 1 to 18 years

OBJECTIVE

To update the American Academy of Pediatrics clinical practice guideline regarding the diagnosis and management of acute bacterial sinusitis in children and adolescents.

METHODS

Analysis of the medical literature published since the last version of the guideline (2001).

RESULTS

The diagnosis of acute bacterial sinusitis is made when a child with an acute upper respiratory tract infection (URI) presents with (1) persistent illness (nasal discharge [of any quality] or daytime cough or both lasting more than 10 days without improvement), (2) a worsening course (worsening or new onset of nasal discharge, daytime cough, or fever after initial improvement), or (3) severe onset (concurrent fever[temperature ≥39°C/102.2°F] and purulent nasal discharge for at least 3 consecutive days). Clinicians should not obtain imaging studies of any kind to distinguish acute bacterial sinusitis from viral URI, because they do not contribute to the diagnosis; however, a contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan of the paranasal sinuses should be obtained whenever a child is suspected of having orbital or central nervous system complications. The clinician should prescribe antibiotic therapy for acute bacterial sinusitis in children with severe onset or worsening course. The clinician should either prescribe antibiotic therapy or offer additional observation for 3 days to children with persistent illness. Amoxicillin with or without clavulanate is the firstline treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis. Clinicians should reassess initial management if there is either a caregiver report of worsening(progression of initial signs/symptoms or appearance of new signs/symptoms) or failure to improve within 72 hours of initial management.If the diagnosis of acute bacterial sinusitis is confirmed in a child with worsening symptoms or failure to improve, then clinicians may change the antibiotic therapy for the child initially managed with antibiotic or initiate antibiotic treatment of the child initially managed with observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in this revision include the addition of a clinical presentation designated as “worsening course,” an option to treat immediately or observe children with persistent symptoms for 3 days before treating, and a review of evidence indicating that imaging is not necessary in children with uncomplicated acute bacterial sinusitis.

Brazilian Academy of Rhinology position paper on topical intranasal therapy

This documents aims at educating those who treat sinonasal diseases - both general practitioners and specialists - about topical nasal treatments. By means of scientific evidence reviews, the Brazilian Academy of Rhinology provides its practical and updated guidelines on the most utilized topical nasal medication, except for the drugs that have topical antibiotics in their formulas.

Safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of nasal polyps in children

BACKGROUND

Mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) improves nasal symptoms and reduces polyp size in adults with nasal polyposis. This 4-month, multinational, randomized, double-blind study was conducted to assess the safety of MFNS in pediatric subjects aged 6-17 yr.

METHODS

Subjects aged 6-11 yr with bilateral nasal polyps received MFNS 100 μg once or twice daily or placebo; those aged 12-17 yr received MFNS 200 μg once or twice daily or placebo. End-points included change in 24-h urinary free cortisol (primary), change in 24-h urinary free cortisol corrected for creatinine (key secondary), and adverse events. Efficacy parameters included polyp size, nasal symptoms, and investigator-evaluated therapeutic response, although the study was not powered for statistical analysis of efficacy.

RESULTS

Least squares baseline mean urinary free cortisol level (nmol/24 h) for both age groups combined (N = 127) was 49.5 in the MFNS once-daily group, 39.6 in the MFNS twice-daily group, and 49.8 in the placebo group. Change in 24-h urinary free cortisol did not significantly differ among MFNS- and placebo-treated subjects. Least squares mean 24-h urinary free cortisol levels corrected for creatinine also showed no significant differences among MFNS- and placebo-treated subjects. No safety issues emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this study confirm the safety profile of MFNS in pediatric patients with bilateral nasal polyps over 4 months, even at double the recommended pediatric dosage for allergic rhinitis.

A retrospective comparison of acute rhinosinusitis outcomes in patients prescribed antibiotics, mometasone furoate nasal spray, or both

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are frequently used to treat acute rhinosinusitis (ARS; acute sinusitis), although many episodes are viral. Because of community resistance concerns, current evidence provides limited support for the use of antibiotics in ARS. We conducted a retrospective comparative effectiveness outcomes assessment of the nasal steroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) versus antibiotics among ARS patients in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using the General Practice Research Database (United Kingdom), the earliest ARS event between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2008 (index event) for patients aged 12-75 years and an antibiotic or MFNS prescription ±2 days was identified. Treatment cohorts were MFNS monotherapy (MM), MFNS + antibiotic (MAT), and antibiotic monotherapy (AM). Logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders and compared odds of rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters and related prescriptions in the 3- to 30-day postindex period.

RESULTS

There were 12,679 eligible patients (651 MM; 2285 MAT; 9743 AM). Compared with the reference cohort AM, during the 3- to 30-day postindex period, lower adjusted odds (p < 0.001) of having one or more rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters was observed for MM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.58) and MAT (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.62); having one or more rhinosinusitis-related prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.63) and MAT (OR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.52-0.65); having one or more antibiotic, nasal steroid, or oral steroid prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.28-0.46) and MAT (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.58); and having one or more antibiotic prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.33-0.58) and MAT (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, (0.55-0.72).

CONCLUSION

Compared with AM, using MFNS for initial ARS treatment, alone or with an antibiotic, is associated with a decreased likelihood of both subsequent rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters and use of related prescriptions.

Decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation for acute sinusitis in children

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation in children with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation in children with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis. We considered the following four interventions: 1) decongestants versus placebo or no medication, 2) antihistamines versus placebo or no medication, 3) decongestant and antihistamine combination versus placebo or no medication, 4) nasal irrigation versus no irrigation. The primary outcomes of the review were symptom resolution (improvement in symptom score from enrolment to day five and overall symptom burden (as measured by average symptom scores while on therapy).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2012, Issue 1), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (1950 to January week 3, 2012) and EMBASE (1950 to January 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs which evaluated children less than 18 years of age with acute sinusitis, defined as 10 to 30 days of rhinorrhea, congestion or daytime cough. We excluded trials of children with chronic sinusitis and allergic rhinitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed each study for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 526 studies found through the electronic searches and handsearching, none met all the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to determine whether the use of antihistamines, decongestants or nasal irrigation is efficacious in children with acute sinusitis. Further research is needed to determine whether these interventions are beneficial in the treatment of children with acute sinusitis.

Intranasal corticosteroids in management of acute sinusitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Acute sinusitis is a common condition in ambulatory care, where it is frequently treated with antibiotics, despite little evidence of their benefit. Intranasal corticosteroids might relieve symptoms; however, evidence for this benefit is currently unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of intranasal corticosteroids on the symptoms of acute sinusitis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases until February 2011 for studies comparing intranasal corticosteroids with placebo in children or adults having clinical symptoms and signs of acute sinusitis or rhinosinusitis in ambulatory settings. We excluded chronic/allergic sinusitis. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the studies' methodologic quality.

RESULTS

We included 6 studies having a total of 2,495 patients. In 5 studies, antibiotics were prescribed in addition to corticosteroids or placebo. Intranasal corticosteroids resulted in a significant, small increase in resolution of or improvement in symptoms at days 14 to 21 (risk difference [RD] = 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.13). Analysis of individual symptom scores revealed most consistently significant benefits for facial pain and congestion. Subgroup analysis by time of reported outcomes showed a significant beneficial effect at 21 days (RD = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06-0.17), but not at 14 to 15 days (RD = 0.05; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.11). Meta-regression analysis of trials using different doses of mometasone furoate showed a significant dose-response relationship (P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal corticosteroids offer a small therapeutic benefit in acute sinusitis, which may be greater with high doses and with courses of 21 days' duration. Further trials are needed in antibiotic-naïve patients.

IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Bacterial Rhinosinusitis in Children and Adults

Evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and initial management of suspected acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in adults and children were prepared by a multidisciplinary expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America comprising clinicians and investigators representing internal medicine, pediatrics, emergency medicine, otolaryngology, public health, epidemiology, and adult and pediatric infectious disease specialties. Recommendations for diagnosis, laboratory investigation, and empiric antimicrobial and adjunctive therapy were developed.

Mometasone furoate nasal spray increases the number of minimal-symptom days in patients with acute rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is triggered by viral or, uncommonly, bacterial infection, causing inflammatory symptoms for ≤12 weeks.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate effects of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) vs amoxicillin and placebo on minimal-symptom days.

METHODS

A double-blind, parallel-group, placebo- and active-controlled 15-day study randomly assigned patients 12 years of age or older to MFNS 200 μg twice daily, MFNS 200 μg once daily, amoxicillin 500 mg 3 times daily, or placebo. Patients had baseline rhinosinusitis major symptom score (MSS; combined rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, congestion, sinus headache, facial pain) of ≥5 and ≤12 (maximum: 15) for 7 to 28 days; scores were similar among groups. Minimal-symptom days and minimal-congestion days were defined post hoc by average am/pm MSS ≤4 and average AM/PM congestion ≤1.

RESULTS

MFNS twice daily (n = 234) showed more minimal-symptom days vs placebo (n = 246) (62.69% vs 50.33%; P < .0001) or amoxicillin (n = 248) (54.35%; P = .0040). The MFNS QD was associated with numerically more minimal-symptom days than amoxicillin or placebo (54.72%; P ≤ .8982). MFNS was associated with more minimal-congestion days than placebo (72.97%, 67.73%, and 56.67% for twice daily, once daily, and placebo; P < .0001, each vs placebo) and MFNS BID with more minimal-congestion days than amoxicillin (72.97% vs 64.15%; P = .0007). Median time to first minimal-symptom day sustained until study end was 8.5 days for MFNS BID vs. 11 for placebo (P = .0085).

CONCLUSION

MFNS 200 μg twice daily significantly increased minimal-symptom days vs amoxicillin or placebo in patients with ARS. Results of this intranasal corticosteroids (INS) therapy indicate it can improve outcomes and potentially reduce inappropriate antibiotic use.

Major symptom score utility index for patients with acute rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of acute rhinosinusitis treatment effectiveness is based on patient-reported relief of symptoms. This study was designed to develop a multiattribute utility scoring algorithm for the Major Symptom Score (MSS) and secondarily to evaluate the psychometric characteristics (i.e., validity and responsiveness) of the MSS Utility Index (MSSUI).

METHODS

Adult patients with acute rhinosinusitis were recruited for this longitudinal observational study through primary care and specialist physician offices. One hundred ninety patients participated in a preference elicitation exercise for MSS health states. Resulting preference data were used to generate a utility scoring algorithm for the MSS. Participants completed the MSS and 20-Question Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) at baseline and completed the MSS twice daily for 15 days via daily diary. On days 7 and 15, participants completed the MSS, SNOT-20, and Overall Treatment Effect scale and were evaluated by physicians via the Physician Global Improvement Scale (PGIS).

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean ± SD. MSSUI score was 0.51 ± 0.17 and was negatively correlated with SNOT-20 scores (r = -0.58; p < 0.001). Days 2-8 average MSSUI scores were negatively correlated with day 7 SNOT-20 (r = -0.46; p < 0.001) and PGIS (r = -0.22; p < 0.001) scores; whereas days 9-15 average MSSUI scores were inversely related to day 15 SNOT-20 (r = -0.40; p < 0.001) and PGIS (r = -0.32, p < 0.001) scores. Mean MSSUI scores improved from baseline with effect sizes at days 7 and 15 of 0.82 and 1.20, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The MSSUI represents an acceptable and psychometrically sound patient-reported end point for clinical trials comparing treatments for acute rhinosinusitis.

Rhinosinusitis diagnosis and management for the clinician: a synopsis of recent consensus guidelines

Rhinosinusitis (RS) affects approximately 1 in 7 adults in the United States, and its effect on quality of life, productivity, and finances is substantial. During the past 10 years, several expert panels from authoritative bodies have published evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of RS and its subtypes, including acute viral RS, acute bacterial RS, chronic RS (CRS) without nasal polyposis, CRS with nasal polyposis, and allergic fungal RS. This review examines and compares the recommendations of the Rhinosinusitis Initiative, the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, the Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis, the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2007, and the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Points of consensus and divergent opinions expressed in these guidelines regarding classification, diagnosis, and management of adults with acute RS (ARS) and CRS and their various subtypes are highlighted for the practicing clinician. Key points of agreement regarding therapy in the guidelines for ARS include the efficacy of symptomatic treatment, such as intranasal corticosteroids, and the importance of reducing the unnecessary use of antibiotics in ARS; however, guidelines do not agree precisely regarding when antibiotics should be considered as a reasonable treatment strategy. Although the guidelines diverge markedly on the management of CRS, the diagnostic utility of nasal airway examination is acknowledged by all. Important and relevant data from MEDLINE-indexed articles published since the most recent guidelines were issued are also considered, and needs for future research are discussed.

Impact of mometasone furoate nasal spray on individual ocular symptoms of allergic rhinitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) are a mainstay of treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) nasal symptoms. The INS mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) has well-documented efficacy and safety for the treatment and prophylaxis of nasal symptoms of seasonal AR (SAR) and for the treatment of nasal symptoms of perennial AR (PAR). Increasing interest has focused on whether INSs, including MFNS, may have beneficial effects on the ocular symptoms frequently associated with AR.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of 10 randomized, placebo-controlled trials of the efficacy of MFNS 200 mcg daily in relieving ocular allergy symptoms, including itching/burning, redness, and tearing/watering in both SAR and PAR. Four PAR studies and six SAR studies are included in the analysis. A fixed-effect inverse variance model was used to calculate weighted mean differences, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each comparison, and a combined overall treatment effect (Z) with P-value.

RESULTS

In both analyses of SAR and PAR studies, including 3132 patients, all individual ocular symptoms were reduced in patients treated with MFNS. Overall treatment effect was significant for all three individual ocular symptoms in the SAR studies (Z = 9.18 for tearing, Z = 10.15 for itching, and Z = 8.88 for redness; P < 0.00001 for all) and in the PAR studies (Z = 5.94, P < 0.00001 for tearing; Z = 2.43, P = 0.02 for itching; and Z = 2.42, P = 0.02 for redness).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings add to the growing body of literature supporting the positive class effect of INSs, including MFNS, on ocular symptoms associated with SAR and PAR.

Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis

This document provides healthcare practitioners with information regarding the management of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to enable them to better meet the needs of this patient population. These guidelines describe controversies in the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) and include recommendations that take into account changes in the bacteriologic landscape. Recent guidelines in ABRS have been released by American and European groups as recently as 2007, but these are either limited in their coverage of the subject of CRS, do not follow an evidence-based strategy, or omit relevant stakeholders in guidelines development, and do not address the particulars of the Canadian healthcare environment.

Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of CRS, along with the development of appropriate therapeutic strategies, have improved outcomes for patients with CRS. CRS now affects large numbers of patients globally and primary care practitioners are confronted by this disease on a daily basis. Although initially considered a chronic bacterial infection, CRS is now recognized as having multiple distinct components (eg, infection, inflammation), which have led to changes in therapeutic approaches (eg, increased use of corticosteroids). The role of bacteria in the persistence of chronic infections, and the roles of surgical and medical management are evolving. Although evidence is limited, guidance for managing patients with CRS would help practitioners less experienced in this area offer rational care. It is no longer reasonable to manage CRS as a prolonged version of ARS, but rather, specific therapeutic strategies adapted to pathogenesis must be developed and diffused.

Guidelines must take into account all available evidence and incorporate these in an unbiased fashion into management recommendations based on the quality of evidence, therapeutic benefit, and risks incurred. This document is focused on readability rather than completeness, yet covers relevant information, offers summaries of areas where considerable evidence exists, and provides recommendations with an assessment of strength of the evidence base and degree of endorsement by the multidisciplinary expert group preparing the document.

These guidelines have been copublished in both Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology and the Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

Decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation for acute sinusitis in children

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation in children with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the efficacy of decongestants, antihistamines and nasal irrigation in children with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis. We considered the following four interventions: 1) decongestants versus placebo or no medication, 2) antihistamines versus placebo or no medication, 3) decongestant and antihistamine combination versus placebo or no medication, 4) nasal irrigation versus no irrigation. The primary outcomes of the review were symptom resolution (improvement in symptom score from enrolment to day 5) and overall symptom burden (as measured by average symptom scores while on therapy).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2010), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (1950 to May Week 1, 2010) and EMBASE (1950 to January 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs which evaluated children less than 18 years of age with acute sinusitis, defined as 10 to 30 days of rhinorrhea, congestion or daytime cough. We excluded trials of children with chronic sinusitis and allergic rhinitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed each study for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 402 studies found through the electronic searches and handsearching, none met all the inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to determine whether the use of antihistamines, decongestants or nasal irrigation is efficacious in children with acute sinusitis. Further research is needed to determine whether these interventions are beneficial in the treatment of children with acute sinusitis.

Treatment of congestion in upper respiratory diseases

Congestion, as a symptom of upper respiratory tract diseases including seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis, is principally caused by mucosal inflammation. Though effective pharmacotherapy options exist, no agent is universally efficacious; therapeutic decisions must account for individual patient preferences. Oral H₁-antihistamines, though effective for the common symptoms of allergic rhinitis, have modest decongestant action, as do leukotriene receptor antagonists. Intranasal antihistamines appear to improve congestion better than oral forms. Topical decongestants reduce congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, but local adverse effects make them unsuitable for long-term use. Oral decongestants show some efficacy against congestion in allergic rhinitis and the common cold, and can be combined with oral antihistamines. Intranasal corticosteroids have broad anti-inflammatory activities, are the most potent long-term pharmacologic treatment of congestion associated with allergic rhinitis, and show some congestion relief in rhinosinusitis and nasal polyposis. Immunotherapy and surgery may be used in some cases refractory to pharmacotherapy. Steps in congestion management include (1) diagnosis of the cause(s), (2) patient education and monitoring, (3) avoidance of environmental triggers where possible, (4) pharmacotherapy, and (5) immunotherapy (for patients with allergic rhinitis) or surgery for patients whose condition is otherwise uncontrolled.

Effects of topical drops and sprays on mucociliary transport time and nasal air flow

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that the nasal topical drops, which could be purchased without a proper prescription, should not be used randomly and non-selectively.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of nasal drops and sprays on the nasal air flow and mucociliary transport time (MTT) in healthy volunteers with no septal deviation and no history of frequent upper respiratory infection.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Saline, fluticasone propionate drops and sprays, mometasone furoate, budesonide, xylometasoline chloride, fusafungine spray, Ringer's lactate and sea water were selected as the agents to be investigated. Volunteers were subdivided into two subgroups according to their rhinomanometric scores: group 1 consisted of subjects with nasal respiration > or =500 ml at 150 daPa and group 2 consisted of those with nasal air flow <500 ml.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found among the effects of these agents on MTT in group 1. In group 2, xylometasoline chloride, fluticasone propionate spray and sea water sprays prolonged the MTT. When the rhinomanometric scores at 150 daPa were assessed, use of xylometasoline chloride, fluticasone propionate drops, budesonide, fusafungine, sea water and Ringer's lactate were found to diminish the nasal air flow with respect to normal values in group 1. In group 2, no significant difference was noticed between normal values and values acquired after use of nasal drops. Comparing the same agents, we did not find a significant difference between groups 1 and 2 regarding MTT and nasal air flow.

Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis

BACKGROUND

Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are effective in relieving symptoms of acute sinusitis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2008, issue 4) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to October 2008), EMBASE (1990 to October 2008) and bibliographies of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered eligible if they compared INCS treatment to placebo treatment of a control group for acute sinusitis; acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by radiological evidence or by nasal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with either resolution or improvement of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were any adverse events that required discontinuation of treatment, drop-outs before the end of the study, rates of relapse, complications and return to school or work.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with 1943 participants met the inclusion criteria. The trials were well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled in which the included participants had acute sinusitis. The treatment assigned was INCS versus control treatment for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow up in the studies were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis were combined, participants receiving INCS were more likely to have resolution or improvement of symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement or complete relief of symptoms: for mometasone furoate (MFNS) 400 mcg versus 200 mcg, (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18 versus RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.11). No significant adverse events were reported and there was no significant difference in the drop-out and recurrence rate for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy, current evidence is limited, but supports the use of INCS as a monotherapy or as an adjuvant therapy to antibiotics. Clinicians should weigh the modest but clinically important benefits against possible minor adverse events when prescribing therapy.

An evidence-based approach to the management of the adult with nasal obstruction

BACKGROUND

Nasal obstruction is a common presenting symptom to the otolaryngology clinic. A variety of structural and mucosal abnormalities can interrupt the subjective sensation of nasal airflow.

METHODS

This review was based on a literature search last performed on 1 October 2008. Current texts and the MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched using the subject heading nasal obstruction in combination with classification, diagnosis, therapy, drug therapy and surgery. Results were limited to include clinical trials, randomised controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and review articles. Relevant references from selected articles were also reviewed.

CONCLUSION

We present an evidence-based approach to history-taking and clinical examination of an adult patient with nasal obstruction and provide an overview of management of the most common causative conditions.

Diagnosis and management of acute rhinosinusitis

Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is a highly prevalent condition with substantial public health implications. The disease is associated with a high degree of disability, impairment of quality of life, and school and workplace absenteeism. Acute rhinosinusitis is most often precipitated by a viral upper respiratory infection or an episode of allergic rhinitis. Typical signs and symptoms include nasal congestion, purulent nasal discharge, headache, cough, and facial pain or tenderness. Diagnosis is usually based on patient history and physical examination. Specialist consultation is indicated for intractable or complicated disease, signified by signs or symptoms suggestive of orbital, intraosseous, or intracranial extension of sinus disease. Most cases of ARS in the ambulatory setting are viral. In the absence of severe or rapidly worsening symptoms, antibiotic prescription should be delayed until an appropriate surveillance period has elapsed. Symptomatic therapy is the most efficient approach for uncomplicated ARS. There is a paucity of data supporting use of commonly used symptomatic therapies, with the exception of intranasal corticosteroids, which have demonstrated rapid improvement of the symptoms of ARS and return to normal functioning when used as monotherapy or as an adjunct to antibiotics.

Safety of intranasal corticosteroids in acute rhinosinusitis

Treatment guidelines for acute rhinosinusitis (RS) recommend the use of intranasal corticosteroids (INSs) as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy. However, the adverse event (AE) profiles of oral glucocorticoids, which result largely from the systemic absorption of those agents, have engendered concerns about the safety of INSs. These concerns persist for INSs despite significant or marked clinical differences between them and systemic corticosteroids in systemic absorption and among the INSs in bioavailability, mechanism of action, and lipophilicity, which may contribute to differences in AEs. For example, the systemic bioavailability of the INSs as a percentage of the administered drug is less than 0.1% for mometasone furoate, less than 1% for fluticasone propionate, 46% for triamcinolone acetonide, and 44% for beclomethasone dipropionate. A review of the safety profiles of INSs, as reported in clinical trials in acute and chronic RS and allergic rhinitis, shows primarily local AEs (eg, epistaxis and headache) that are generally classified as mild to moderate, with occurrence rates that are similar to those with placebo. Studies of the safety of mometasone furoate, fluticasone propionate, budesonide, and triamcinolone acetonide did not identify any evidence of systemic AEs, such as growth retardation in children due to suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, bone mineral density loss, or cataracts, which suggests that INSs can be safely administered in patients with acute RS without concern for systemic AEs.

Intranasal corticosteroids in the treatment of acute rhinosinusitis

Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is one of the most frequent diagnoses in clinical practice. Common symptoms include anterior and/or posterior nasal drainage, nasal obstruction, and facial pain, pressure, or sensation of fullness. ARS etiology is more often viral than bacterial, and infection-initiated inflammation is the primary pathophysiologic mechanism responsible for symptoms. Because ARS is usually a self-limited process, the primary goal of treatment is symptom relief, which can be more effectively achieved by targeting the underlying inflammation. Intranasal steroids (INS) have been shown to reduce components of respiratory inflammation and increase symptom relief for ARS when used alone or combined with antibiotics. Based on current evidence in support of INS therapy, the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2007 guidelines and a recent Cochrane meta-analysis recommend using INS in the treatment of ARS, both as monotherapy and as an adjunct to antibiotics.

Sleep impairment in allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis

Sleep impairment is a significant problem for patients with inflammatory disorders of the upper respiratory tract, such as allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. Nasal congestion, one of the most common and bothersome symptoms of these conditions, is associated with sleep-disordered breathing and is thought to be a key cause of sleep impairment. This review examines sleep impairment associated with allergic rhinitis, rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. It explores the adverse effects of disturbed sleep on patients' quality of life and how these inflammatory nasal conditions can be reduced by therapies that address the underlying problems affecting sleep. Treatment with intranasal corticosteroids has been shown to reduce nasal congestion in inflammatory disorders of the upper respiratory tract. Data on sleep-related end points from clinical trials of intranasal corticosteroids indicate that this reduction is associated with improved sleep, reduced daytime fatigue, and improved quality of life. Further research using measures of sleep as primary end points is warranted, based on the potential of these agents to improve sleep and quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis, acute rhinosinusitis, and nasal polyposis. Such trials will help to identify the most effective therapies for sleep impairment in these 3 nasal conditions.