A reappraisal of nasal saline solution use in chronic sinusitis

Results of a RCT assessing saline and xylitol nasal irrigation for CRS and fatigue in Gulf War illness

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of saline nasal irrigation (S-NI) and xylitol nasal irrigation (X-NI) for chronic rhinosinusitis in participants with Gulf War illness (GWI).

METHODS

This 26 week, 3-arm (1:1:1) randomized controlled trial examined veterans meeting criteria for GWI with moderate-to-severe chronic rhinosinusitis and fatigue symptoms. All participants received standard of care for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS); additionally, S-NI or X-NI participants added twice-daily NI using 2% saline or 5% xylitol solutions. Outcomes included disease-specific quality of life (primary; sino-nasal outcome test [SNOT-20]; 0-100 points), overall quality of life (Short-Form 36), and fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Index). Outcome assessors were blind to allocation group. Intention-to-treat analysis used repeated measures modeling; statistical significance was evaluated at the two-sided α level of .05.

RESULTS

Randomization (N = 40) produced three similar groups regarding sex (male, 80%), age (53.8 ± 7.8 years), duration (19.8 ± 7.7 years), and illness severity (48.5 ± 12.7 SNOT-20 points). Age- and gender-adjusted between-group comparison showed that X-NI participants, compared with control, reported improved SNOT-20 scores at 8 weeks (13.5 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -27.9 to 0.9) and at 26 weeks (15.4 points, 95% CI -30.1 to -0.6). S-NI participants improved by 13.4 points (95% CI -28.8, 2.1) at 26 weeks compared with control.The improvement in both NI groups approached minimal clinical important difference compared to control for the SNOT-20 in the general population. Secondary outcomes were not different between groups. Satisfaction in both irrigation groups was high.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized controlled trial suggests that NI with saline or xylitol improves chronic sinus symptoms among participants with GWI with improvement scores similar to those in the general population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b, individual randomized controlled trial.

Effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices: a Thai multicentre survey

Background

Nasal irrigation is widely used as an adjunctive treatment for nasal diseases. There is little evidence regarding the efficacy of the devices used in this procedure. The objective of this survey was to evaluate the effectiveness of nasal irrigation devices based on the experiences of patients and physicians.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre survey study between November 2017 and October 2018. Physician and patient questionnaires were developed based on the available literature and expert opinion. The physician questionnaire was submitted to the Otolaryngology residents and staff of each centre and their network. The physicians were also asked to distribute the patient questionnaire to their patients.

Results

Information regarding 331 devices used by the patients was collected. The mean age of the patients was 45.46 ± 17.19 years (from 5 to 81). Roughly half were male, and half were female (48.6%: 51.4%). Among the high-pressure devices, we found that the high-pressure large-volume nasal irrigation devices yielded significantly higher symptom scores in seven of 12 domains (p < 0.05). Among the large-volume devices, we found that the large-volume high-pressure nasal irrigation devices received significantly higher symptom scores in 4 of 12 domains (p < 0.05). However, a higher proportion of patients using the large-volume high-pressure devices had retained fluid in the sinuses compared to those using large-volume low-pressure devices (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This survey supports the regular use of nasal irrigation, particularly with large-volume high-pressure devices, as an effective treatment for nasal disease. It may be effective at clearing nasal secretion, improve nasal congestion, decrease post-nasal drip, improve sinus pain or headache, improve taste and smell, and improve sleep quality. It could be used by patients with good compliance and minimal side effects.

[Nasal irrigation: opportunities and disadvantages]

RELEVANCE

Despite the widespread use of nasal irrigation in routine medical practice and a significant list of salt solution for nasal irrigation on the pharmaceutical market, contradictions remain in understanding of process essence, when salt solution acts on the mucous membrane of nasal cavity and evaluation of their effectiveness.

AIM

analysis of current data of frequency, methods and efficiency of systematic nasal irrigation and effect of salt solution at the mucous membrane of nasal cavity.

RESULTS

In review the authors generalized and analyzed recent information about meaning of nasal irrigation for upper respiratory tract disease, about role of nasal mucus at maintaining homeostasis in nasal cavity and initial respiratory tract in general. Describes the data about effect of nasal irrigation on antinfectious protect of mucous membrane of nasal cavity.

Nasal care in intensive care unit patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate nasal hygiene in intensive care patients and improve patient care using isotonic saline nasal spray.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In the study group, over a period of tendays saline nasal spray was administered four times daily. Nasal treatment was not given to the control group. Each patient was examined with a flexible nasopharyngoscope before and after the treatment and a nasal culture was taken.

RESULTS

In the study group, the secretion score (1- absent; 2- serosal; 3- seropurulent and 4- purulent) mean value improved from 1.9 to 1.4. In the control group, the secretion score mean value had risen from 1.7 to 3.1. At the beginning of the study, there was no difference in secretion scores between the groups, but on the tenth day a statistically significant difference was found.

CONCLUSION

The use of saline nasal spray in this group of intensive care patients was found to be effective in achieving nasal hygiene.

Isotonic saline nasal irrigation is an effective adjunctive therapy to intranasal corticosteroid spray in allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to determine if the addition of large-volume, low-positive pressure nasal irrigations delivered with isotonic sodium chloride (hereinafter "saline") added to intranasal corticosteroid therapy improves quality of life and objective measures of nasal breathing in patients with allergic rhinitis when compared with intranasal corticosteroid alone.

METHODS

A prospective, unblinded, single-arm pilot study was performed of patients with allergic rhinitis already on intranasal corticosteroid pharmacotherapy. Patients added large-volume low-pressure saline irrigation twice daily for 8 weeks to their ongoing regiment of nasal corticosteroid. Mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of life Questionnaire (mRQLQ) assessment and nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) were performed at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients were enrolled. Twice-daily nasal irrigation with isotonic saline significantly (p < 0.001) reduced mRQLQ scores, from 36.7 ± 20.48 (baseline) to 14.9 ± 11.03 (4 weeks) to 10.10 ± 10.65 (8 weeks). No significant changes were seen in NPIF, pattern use of nasal steroid use, or adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Large-volume, low-positive pressure nasal irrigation with isotonic saline is an effective adjunctive therapy to improve quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis already on intranasal corticosteroid therapy. This study was a part of the clinical trial NCT01030146 registered at clinicaltrials.gov.

Compliance and efficacy of saline irrigation in pediatric chronic rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate compliance with and effectiveness of nasal irrigation in children with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and to assess its clinical course.

METHODS

Seventy-seven children with refractory CRS resistant to medical treatment including antibiotics and nasal corticosteroids were included. We evaluated patients' nasal symptom and Lund Mackay CT scores at baseline. All patients were educated about nasal irrigation and encouraged to perform nasal irrigation 1-3 times a day. After 1 month, patients were reevaluated regarding compliance with the protocol and improvement of CRS by assessing symptom score and endoscopic evaluation. The patients were followed up for at least two months to assess need for further treatment including surgery.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 8.3 years ranging from 4 to 13 years. Mean follow-up duration with nasal saline irrigation was 6.2 months (2-32 months). Forty nine patients (63.6%) successfully carried out nasal irrigation during follow-up (good compliance [GC] group) and 28 patients (36.4%) did not successfully carry out nasal irrigation (poor compliance [PC] group). There were no significant differences between GC and PC groups regarding clinical characteristics and baseline Lund-MacKay CT scores. Subjective and objective improvements were observed in 36 patients (73.5%) in the GC group and 14 patients (50.0%) in the PC group. Surgery including endoscopic sinus surgery and/or adenoidectomy was performed in 8 patients (16.3%) in the GC group and 12 patients (42.9%) in the PC group. The rate of surgical treatment was significantly different between the groups (p=0.019).

CONCLUSION

Nasal irrigation in children with long standing CRS is relatively well tolerated (63.6%) and effective. Nasal saline irrigation should be considered as a primary treatment tool in CRS even in pediatric age group.

Efficacy of nasal irrigation in the treatment of acute sinusitis in atopic children

BACKGROUND

Nasal irrigation has been used as adjunctive therapy for sinonasal disease but is under-researched in children. The study aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of nasal irrigation with normal saline in the management of acute sinusitis in atopic children.

METHODS

We enrolled 60 atopic children with acute sinusitis, of whom 29 received nasal irrigation with normal saline and 31 did not receive nasal irrigation. All participants underwent a nasal peak expiratory flow rate (nPEFR) test, a nasal smear examination, and radiography (Water's projection) and were requested to complete a Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ) during the baseline visit. All participants were requested to record symptoms in a daily diary and were followed up at 1-week intervals. A physical examination, nasal smear, and nPEFR were performed at each visit, and all daily diaries were collected. At the final visit (after 3 weeks), the symptom diaries were reviewed and participants were requested to complete the PRQLQ again. nPEFR, radiography, and a nasal smear were also repeated.

RESULTS

There were significant improvements in mean PRQLQ and nPEFR values (p < 0.05) for the irrigation compared to the non-irrigation group. There was no significant difference in radiographic findings between the groups (p > 0.05). The irrigation group recorded significant improvements in eye congestion, rhinorrhea, nasal itching, sneezing, and cough symptoms compared with the non-irrigation group.

CONCLUSION

Nasal irrigation is an effective adjunctive treatment for acute sinusitis in atopic children.

Is nasal saline irrigation all it is cracked up to be?

OBJECTIVE

This review examines the literature regarding nasal saline irrigation in the management of sinonasal disease. We explore the various properties of nasal irrigation solutions and their effects on nasal symptoms.

DATA SOURCES

English-language studies identified from MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 2011.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs), prospective controlled and comparative studies, and observational studies reporting on the indications, efficacy, and safety of nasal saline irrigation.

RESULTS

Nasal saline irrigation has often been used as both a solo and an adjunctive treatment in sinonasal diseases, including allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis. Nasal saline irrigation has contributed to a reduction of inflammation as well as relief of nasal symptoms. Identifying the optimal technique is hampered by the fact that studies have employed various delivery devices and saline compositions, which subsequently have demonstrated different effects on mucus clearance, ciliary beat activity, and inflammatory mediators.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the data appear to demonstrate some small clinical benefit to nasal saline irrigation. Nasal saline irrigation is well tolerated, with minimal side effects. Further definitive studies are needed to optimize efficacy.

Efficacy of nasal irrigation in the treatment of acute sinusitis in children

BACKGROUND

Nasal irrigation has been used as an adjunctive therapy of sinonasal disease including acute/chronic sinusitis and allergic rhinitis. Several published articles reported it also improves clinical sinus symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of normal saline nasal irrigation in the management of acute sinusitis in children.

DESIGN

This was a randomized, prospective placebo-controlled study.

METHODS

We included 69 participants with acute sinusitis. 30 of 69 participants underwent normal saline nasal irrigation. 39 of 69 participants were not receiving nasal irrigation. All participants performed nasal peak expiratory flow rate (nPEFR) test, nasal smear examination, radiography (Water's projection) and requested to complete the Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaires (PRQLQ) at the baseline visit. All participants were requested to record the symptom diary card every day and were followed-up every 1 week during this period. A physical examination, nasal smear and nPEFR were performed at each visit, and all daily diary cards collected. At the final visit, the symptoms diaries were reviewed and participants were requested to complete the PRQLQ again. The nPEFR, radiography (Water's projection) and nasal smear were also repeated.

RESULTS

Normal saline irrigation group significantly improved mean PRQLQ values and nPEFR values at medium (T=2.816, P<0.05) and final period (T=2.767, P<0.05) compared with the other group. Although there were no statically significant improving rate of radiography (Water's projection) in among two groups (T=0.545, P>0.05), but normal saline irrigation group was better than the other group. The improval rate of mean TSS in the irrigation group significantly improved all symptoms compared with the placebo group, in which rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, throat itching, cough and sleep quality improved. 27 of 66 (40.9%) participants with atopy, 16 of 27 (53.33%) participants underwent normal saline irrigation. Normal saline irrigation atopy group significantly improved rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, throat itching and sleep quality symptoms compared with non-irrigation atopy group. Normal saline irrigation atopy group significantly improved nPEFR values at final period (Z=2.53, P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study evidence that normal saline nasal irrigation improves Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life and decreases acute sinusitis symptoms. Nasal irrigation is an effective adjunctive treatment for pediatric acute sinusitis. Normal saline nasal irrigation in atopy children also improves allergic-related symptoms. We may need larger, longer and extended study to assess the conclusion.

Rhinosinusitis in children

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in children were published by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2001. Changes in the antibiotic susceptibility patterns for the common pathogens causing both acute and chronic rhinosinusitis warrant a reevaluation and update of these recommendations. In addition, there was only a very brief discussion of chronic disease in this publication, with the conclusion that the pathogenesis and management of recurrent or prolonged infection were essentially unknown. Although there are still insufficient data in the literature to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines, a careful review of recent literature and the clinical experience of experts who manage pediatric chronic sinusitis are presented in an effort to provide some specific recommendations and to offer practical treatment options. Factors associated with chronic rhinosinusitis should be addressed individually and include environmental pollution, recurrent viral upper respiratory infections, allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, ciliary dyskinesia, cystic fibrosis, immunodeficiency, gastroesophageal reflux, and anatomic abnormalities.

Chronic sinusitis in children

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute sinusitis in children have been published by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Of note is that in this document, a brief discussion of chronic disease concluded that the pathogenesis and management are essentially unknown. Although there are insufficient data in the literature to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines, a careful review of the literature and clinical experience of experts who manage pediatric chronic sinusitis is presented in an effort to develop specific recommendations and to offer practical treatment options. Factors associated with chronic sinusitis should be addressed individually and include recurrent viral upper respiratory infections, allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, ciliary dyskinesia, cystic fibrosis, immunodeficiency, and anatomic abnormalities. Bacteriology includes the 3 pathogens associated with acute disease i.e., Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis but with chronic sinusitis also includes Staphylococcus aureus, anaerobic bacteria, and fungi. Medical interventions discussed include endoscopic sinus surgery, saline nasal irrigation, intranasal decongestant therapy, intranasal steroids, and oral antibiotics. Clinical ranking without regard to side effects and cost suggests that endoscopic sinus surgery and antral irrigation have the highest probability of substantial symptom improvement. Other issues discussed include identification and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), allergy, and immune deficiency.