The effectiveness of evidence-based nursing intervention for nasal irrigation after endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate its effect of an evidence-based nursing program for nasal irrigation after endoscopic sinus surgery in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

METHODS

A total of 66 patients with CRS were randomly divided into two groups, for which the experimental group received evidence-based nasal irrigation nursing, and the control group received conventional nursing. Differences in Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-20 (SNOT-20), visual analogue scale (VAS), Lund-Mackay CT, Endoscopic Lund Kennedy Score (LKES) and overall efficacy were assessed between the two groups.

RESULTS

2, 4 and 12 weeks after the intervention, the scores of SNOT-20, VAS, Lund-Mackay CT and LKES in the two groups were significantly lower than those before the surgery (P < 0.05). Compared with the control group, the scores were significantly lower in the experimental group (P < 0.05). 12 weeks after the intervention, the overall effective rate of treatment in the experimental group was 90.62%, while the control group was 16.43%, but the difference was not statistically significant in treatment effect (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of nasal irrigation evidence-based nursing program for patients with CRS after endoscopic sinus surgery can promote postoperative nasal mucosal recovery, improve treatment efficiency, and help improve patient comfort, quality of life and other subjective feelings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered retrospectively with reference number ChiCTR2300075484 on 06/09/2023, available at: https://www.chictr.org.cn .

Do variations in nasal irrigation recipes and storage effect the risk of bacterial contamination?

OBJECTIVE

Make-at-home nasal irrigation solutions are often recommended for treating chronic rhinosinusitis. Many patients will store pre-made solution for convenient use. This study investigated the microbiological properties of differing recipes and storage temperatures.

METHOD

Three irrigation recipes (containing sodium chloride, sodium bicarbonate and sucrose) were stored at 5oC and 22oC. Further samples were inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Sampling and culturing were conducted at intervals from day 0-12 to examine for bacterial presence or persistence.

RESULTS

No significant bacterial growth was detected in any control solution stored at 5oC. Saline solutions remained relatively bacterial free, with poor survival of inoculated bacteria, which may be related to either lower pH or lower osmolality. Storing at room temperature increased the risk of contamination in control samples, particularly from pseudomonas.

CONCLUSION

If refrigerated, pre-made nasal irrigation solutions can be stored safely for up to 12 days without risking cross-contamination to irrigation equipment or patients.

Optimal Device and Regimen of Nasal Saline Treatment for Sinonasal Diseases: Systematic Review

Objective

This review aimed to systematically determine the optimal nasal saline regimen for different types of sinonasal diseases.

Data Sources

PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov. The last search was on December 6, 2021.

Review Methods

Study selection was done by 2 independent authors. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses were included. The effects of nasal saline treatment through various devices, saline tonicities, and buffer statuses were evaluated in patients with allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), CRS with cystic fibrosis, and postoperative care, including septoplasty/turbinoplasty and endoscopic sinus surgery.

Results

Sixty-nine studies were included: 10 meta-analyses and 59 randomized controlled trials. For allergic rhinitis, large-volume devices (≥60 mL) were effective for treating adults, while low-volume devices (5-59 mL) were effective for children. Isotonic saline was preferred over hypertonic saline due to fewer adverse events. For acute rhinosinusitis, saline irrigation was beneficial in children, but it was an option for adults. Large-volume devices were more effective, especially in the common cold subgroup. For CRS, large-volume devices were effective for adults, but saline drop was the only regimen that had available data in children. Buffered isotonic saline was more tolerable than nonbuffered or hypertonic saline. The data for CRS with cystic fibrosis and nonallergic rhinitis were limited. For postoperative care, buffered isotonic saline delivered by large-volume devices was effective.

Conclusion

Nasal saline treatment is recommended for treating most sinonasal diseases. Optimal delivery methods for each condition should be considered to achieve therapeutic effects of saline treatment.

Essentials in saline pharmacology for nasal or respiratory hygiene in times of COVID-19

PURPOSE

Nasal irrigation or nebulizing aerosol of isotonic or hypertonic saline is a traditional method for respiratory or nasal care. A recent small study in outpatients with COVID-19 without acute respiratory distress syndrome suggests substantial symptom resolution. We therefore analyzed pharmacological/pharmacodynamic effects of isotonic or hypertonic saline, relevant to SARS-CoV-2 infection and respiratory care.

METHODS

Mixed search method.

RESULTS

Due to its wetting properties, saline achieves an improved spreading of alveolar lining fluid and has been shown to reduce bio-aerosols and viral load. Saline provides moisture to respiratory epithelia and gels mucus, promotes ciliary beating, and improves mucociliary clearance. Coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2 damage ciliated epithelium in the nose and airways. Saline inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in Vero cells; possible interactions involve the viral ACE2-entry mechanism (chloride-dependent ACE2 configuration), furin and 3CLpro (inhibition by NaCl), and the sodium channel ENaC. Saline shifts myeloperoxidase activity in epithelial or phagocytic cells to produce hypochlorous acid. Clinically, nasal or respiratory airway care with saline reduces symptoms of seasonal coronaviruses and other common cold viruses. Its use as aerosol reduces hospitalization rates for bronchiolitis in children. Preliminary data suggest symptom reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 patients if saline is initiated within 48 h of symptom onset.

CONCLUSIONS

Saline interacts at various levels relevant to nasal or respiratory hygiene (nasal irrigation, gargling or aerosol). If used from the onset of common cold symptoms, it may represent a useful add-on to first-line interventions for COVID-19. Formal evaluation in mild COVID-19 is desirable as to establish efficacy and optimal treatment regimens.

Nasal irrigation with Glycyrrhiza glabra extract for treatment of allergic rhinitis - A study of in vitro, in vivo and clinical trial

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Glycyrrhiza glabra, a family of licorice and a traditional Chinese medicine with sweet taste and favorable smell, has anti-inflammatory, anti-allergic and immunomodulatory functions.

AIM OF THE STUDY

We developed a licorice extract (LE) by using glycyrrhiza glabra and administered it through nasal irrigation to treat allergic rhinitis (AR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LE was prepared into extract powder, and the anti-inflammatory effect of the LE was evaluated by calcium ionophore-induced activated mast cell model (in vitro). Then, local passive anaphylaxis assays were applied to investigate the anti-IgE-mediated allergic reaction of the LE in mice (in vivo). A developed LE was administered through nasal irrigation to treat AR in clinic settings. A total of 60 participants diagnosed with AR were included in this clinical trial; they were randomly assigned to three interventions: licorice nasal irrigation (LNI), corticosteroid nasal irrigation (CNI), and saline nasal irrigation (SNI). They performed nasal irrigation once a day for 1 month. Both subjective questionnaires (22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test [SNOT-22] and visual analog scale [VAS]) and objective examinations (acoustic rhinometry and nasal endoscopy) were used for effectiveness assessments.

RESULTS

All three interventions could improve SNOT-22 scores, but the effects of LNI and CNI were more significant. According to VAS scores for nasal blockage, rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal pruritus, postnasal discharge, and olfactory disturbance, the effect of LNI was superior to those of CNI and SNI. The results of rhinometry revealed that LNI significantly improved nasal resistance. Endoscopic analysis showed that both LNI and CNI, but not SNI, could significantly improve turbinate hypertrophy. Moreover, the best procedural comfort was found for LNI, which had no side effects or complications during the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

LNI is a natural, safe, and innovative therapy that can effectively treat AR. Its effect is superior to those of CNI and SNI, and it has greatly improved procedural comfort.

Effect of adjunctive sodium hyaluronate versus surfactant nasal irrigation on mucociliary clearance in allergic rhinitis: a single-blind, randomised, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of nasal irrigation with sodium hyaluronate and surfactant solutions on mucociliary clearance time in patients with mild persistent allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients diagnosed with mild persistent allergic rhinitis were enrolled in this prospective study. The patients were allocated randomly to the surfactant, sodium hyaluronate or isotonic saline (as a control) nasal irrigation group. The mucociliary clearance times and improvements in mucociliary clearance times were compared.

RESULTS

Improvements in mean mucociliary clearance time were significantly greater in the surfactant and sodium hyaluronate groups than in the control group (p < 0.01). The mean post-treatment mucociliary clearance time of the surfactant group was significantly lower than that of the control (p < 0.001) and sodium hyaluronate groups (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Surfactant and sodium hyaluronate nasal irrigation solutions may both be used as adjunctive treatments for allergic rhinitis. Surfactant nasal irrigation resulted in better mucociliary clearance times.

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.

Sinus irrigation penetration after balloon sinuplasty vs functional endoscopic sinus surgery in a cadaveric model

BACKGROUND

Nasal irrigation is a cornerstone of treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis. The purpose of this study was to quantify irrigation penetration to the sinuses following balloon sinuplasty and functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS).

METHODS

Balloon sinuplasty followed by FESS was performed on 4 cadaver heads. Using a high-volume, high-flow bottle, each head was irrigated with fluorescein-dyed water prior to and following each procedure, and recorded by rigid endoscopy through trephinations. Three blinded, fellowship-trained rhinologists reviewed videos and scored the extent of staining (using an accepted scale of 0 to 3) for each site.

RESULTS

The mean score prior to any procedure was maxillary sinus 1.67, frontal sinus 1.29, and nasal cavity 1.71. After balloon sinuplasty the mean was maxillary 2.25, frontal 2.04, and nasal cavity 2.17. After FESS the mean was maxillary 2.75, frontal 2.08, and nasal cavity 2.63. There was a statistically significant increase for both maxillary (p = 0.005) and frontal sinuses (p = 0.006) following balloon sinuplasty. There was a statistically significant increase following FESS compared to balloon for the maxillary sinus (p = 0.003), but not the frontal sinus (p = 0.96). Interrater reliability was good, with Cronbach's alpha of 0.85.

CONCLUSION

Irrigation improved in all sinuses following balloon sinuplasty and FESS. There was further improvement to the maxillary sinus after FESS; however, there was no difference in irrigation to the frontal sinuses following FESS compared to balloon sinuplasty. Extended frontal sinus approaches such as the Modified Lothrop procedure should be considered if more extensive access for irrigation is required.

Effect of the temperature of nasal lavages on mucociliary clearance: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The respiratory epithelium is mainly constituted by caliciform (produces mucus, responsible of keeping moisture and trapping particles) and ciliated cells (transports mucus into the pharynx, by the movement of multiple cilia). For centuries, nasal lavages have been used for different rhinosinusal conditions. Some studies suggest not only a direct effect on the mobilisation of secretions, but also an improvement in mucociliary clearance rates. To our knowledge, the impact of temperature in nasal lavages has been scarcely studied.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

We used the saccharin test-applying it in the inferior turbinate and timing the detection of its taste-, to estimate mucociliary clearance rates before and after nasal lavages with saline solution at room (20 °C) or body (37 °C) temperatures.

RESULTS

78 healthy subjects were studied, with a mean saccharin test time of 13.88 min. Then, a nasal lavage was performed, half with 20 °C saline and the other with 37 °C. In both, times improved from baseline (from 13.66 to 11.59 and 14.06 to 9.4 min, respectively) with p values < 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal lavages with saline solution improve mucociliary clearance as measured by saccharin test. Temperature seems to matter, which should be taken into account when indicating nasal lavages to our patients.