Nasal smear eosinophilia for the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis and eosinophilic non-allergic rhinitis

Clinical Evidence of Type 2 Inflammation in Non-allergic Rhinitis with Eosinophilia Syndrome: a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) includes different subtypes, among which NAR with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) is the most important because of severity of symptoms and the high risk of comorbidities. Its pathophysiology is still object of debate, but a crucial role of chronic eosinophilic inflammation has been recognized. The aim of this review is to critically analyze the current evidence regarding the hypothesis that NARES may be considered a type 2 inflammatory disorder.

RECENT FINDINGS

The definition and diagnostic criteria for NARES are not universally shared and adopted, thus generating difficulties in reproducing the results. At present, there is extreme heterogeneity in sampling methods and disagreement in the cut-off of local eosinophilic count to determine a diagnosis of NARES. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) standard was applied to identify English-language experimental and clinical articles regarding NARES. The search was performed in April 2021. Twenty-six articles were included. Our data suggest a particular heterogeneity regarding sampling and specific cut-offs adopted for diagnosis of NARES and consensus should be reached. We suggest that eosinophil count should be reported as an absolute value for at least 10 observed rich fields in order to increase the level of standardization. Consensus among authors on this topic should be reached with particular attention to the cut-off for diagnosis. In the future, this limitation may be overcome by the identification of repeatable biomarkers to refine diagnosis and prognosis of NARES. Furthermore, our data strongly suggest that NARES have numerous similarities with clinical features of the most common type 2 diseases such as eosinophilic asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP): late onset, association with type 2 comorbidities, selective eosinophilic tissue infiltration, remarkable response to oral and intranasal corticosteroids, and progression in a type 2 CRSwNP.

The prevalence of non-allergic rhinitis phenotypes in the general population: A cross-sectional study

Background

Non‐allergic rhinitis (NAR) can be subdivided into several phenotypes: rhinorrhea of the elderly, rhinitis medicamentosa, smokers', occupational, hormonal, drug‐induced, gustatory, and idiopathic rhinitis. There are two pathophysiological endotypes of NAR: inflammatory and neurogenic. Phenotypes may serve as an indicator of an underlying endotype and, therefore, help to guide the treatment. The prevalence of each phenotype in the general population is currently unknown.

Methodology/Principal

Cross‐sectional questionnaire‐based study in the general population of the Netherlands.

Results

The prevalence of chronic rhinitis in the general population was 40% (N = 558, of those, 65% had NAR and 28% AR, in 7% allergy status is unknown). Individuals with NAR (N = 363) had significantly more complaints in October–February. Those with AR (N = 159) had significantly more complaints in April–August. The most common NAR phenotypes were idiopathic (39%) and rhinitis medicamentosa (14%), followed by occupational (8%), smokers' (6%), hormonal (4%), gustatory (4%), and rhinorrhea of the elderly (4%). The least prevalent phenotype was drug induced (1%). Nineteen percent of the NAR group could not be classified into any of the phenotypes.

Conclusions

This is the first study to describe the prevalences of NAR phenotypes in the general population. AR and NAR have a distinct seasonality pattern with NAR being more prevalent in autumn/winter and AR in spring/summer. Our data on the prevalence of phenotypes may help clinicians to anticipate the type of patients at their clinic and help guide a tailored treatment approach. The high prevalence of rhinitis medicamentosa is alarming, since this is a potentially preventable phenotype.

Prevalence, comorbidities, diagnosis, and treatment of nonallergic rhinitis: real-world comparison with allergic rhinitis

Rhinitis is among the most common respiratory diseases in children. Nonallergic rhinitis, which involves nasal symptoms without evidence of systemic allergic inflammation or infection, is a heterogeneous entity with diverse manifestations and intensities. Nonallergic rhinitis accounts for 16%-89% of the chronic rhinitis cases, affecting 1%-50% (median 10%) of the total pediatric population. The clinical course of nonallergic rhinitis is generally rather mild and less likely to be associated with allergic comorbidities than allergic rhinitis. Here, we aimed to estimate the rate of coexisting comorbidities of nonallergic rhinitis. Nonallergic rhinitis is more prevalent during the first 2 years of life; however, its underestimation for children with atopic tendencies is likely due to low positive rates of specific allergic tests during early childhood. Local allergic rhinitis is a recently noted phenotype with rates similar to those in adults (median, 44%; range, 4%-67%), among patients previously diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis. Idiopathic rhinitis, a subtype of nonallergic rhinitis, has been poorly studied in children, and its rates are known to be lower than those in adults. The prevalence of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome is even lower. A correlation between nonallergic rhinitis and pollution has been suggested owing to the recent increase in nonallergic rhinitis rates in highly developing regions such as some Asian countries, but many aspects remain unknown. Conventional treatments include antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids, and recent treatments include combination of intranasal corticosteroids with azelastin or decongestants. Here we review the prevalence, diagnosis, comorbidities, and treatment recommendations for nonallergic rhinitis versus allergic rhinitis in children.

Diagnosis and treatment of non-allergic rhinitis: focus on immunologic mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) is a heterogeneous nasal disease with high global prevalence. NAR can be subclassified as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), vasomotor rhinitis (VMR), and local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Although the precise factors involved in the etiology of NAR are not clear, there is evidence that immunological factors play an important role in the pathogenesis of NAR. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological and neurogenic mechanisms involved in the diagnosis and treatment of NAR.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the immunological basis of diagnostic and treatment strategies for NARES, VMR, and LAR. In particular, recently documented molecular and immunological mechanisms of NAR are discussed, which may help to better understand the mechanisms underlying the pathologies of the different endotypes of NAR.

EXPERT OPINION

An increasing number of studies investigating the pathogenesis of NAR suggest that the immunological mechanisms underlying the different subtypes of NAR vary greatly, and are still not fully understood to accurately diagnose these subtypes. Thus, further studies should focus on making diagnosis and treatment of NAR more precise, safe, and effective. A better understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in NAR should help in the discovery of new diagnostic and treatment strategies.

Diagnosis and management of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome using cystatin SN together with symptoms

Background

The diagnosis and treatment of nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) remain controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether Cystatin SN together with symptoms can be used to diagnose NARES and to measure the efficiency of medical treatment.

Methods

Seventy-five patients with chronic rhinitis (CR) and 18 control subjects were enrolled. Their clinical characteristics were reviewed and laboratory parameters were evaluated. The concentration of Cystatin SN in nasal secretions was determined using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The histological assessment of Cystatin SN in the nasal mucosa was conducted by hematoxylin and eosin staining. The logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess the predictive value of parameters for NARES.

Results

Nasal obstruction, sneezing, loss of smell, and total visual analogue scale (VAS) score were significantly different among the patients with CR. In particular, olfaction score was higher in patients with NARES than in those without NARES (AR, LAR, or IR). Similarly, the Cystatin SN level was significantly different between the control subjects and patients with CR. After treatment for 2 weeks, the Cystatin SN level and VAS score were significantly decreased in the NARES group. The accuracy of Cystatin SN together with local sIgE and loss of smell to diagnose NARES was up to 0.987 (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 93.1%).

Conclusions

Cystatin SN with local sIgE and loss of smell may serve as one of the reliable and alternative biomarkers for the diagnosis of NARES and be used to evaluate disease severity and NARES treatment efficacy.

The Distinguishing Clinical Features of Nonallergic Rhinitis Patients

Background

Not all rhinitis patients are affected by an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated inflammatory process. Skin and serum allergy assessments are limited in their ability to define local allergic rhinitis (LAR). Thus, patients with negative systemic allergy assessments comprise a mix of those who truly have nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) and patients with LAR.

Objective

To determine the clinical characteristics of patients with NAR.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was performed on consecutive adults with rhinitis symptoms who underwent turbinate surgery. NAR patients were defined by excluding allergy using both systemic (serum-specific IgE and/or skin prick test) and local (inferior turbinate tissue-specific IgE) tests. Allergic rhinitis (AR) patients were defined by any positive systemic or local test toward aeroallergens. The clinical characteristics studied included allergic comorbidities (asthma, eczema, allergic conjunctivitis), inhalant allergen triggers (dust, pollen, animal dander), and environmental triggers (Cincinnati Irritant Index [CII]).

Results

There were 154 participants (41.79 ± 14.78 years, 37.7% female). NAR patients (11.7%) were older (49.33 ± 15.99 vs 40.78 ± 14.38 years, P = .02), had less self-reported asthma (5.6% vs 36.3%, P < .01) and house dust inhalant trigger (38.9 vs 65.2%, P = .03) compared to AR patients. The CII score was similar for NAR and AR (31.06 ± 28.88 vs 35.49 ± 24.70, P = .61).

Conclusion

Patients who were older, without asthma, and lacked an inhalant allergy trigger were more likely to have true NAR. Environmental triggers are not distinguishing features of NAR. This may be used as a guide to identify rhinitis patients whose symptoms are truly nonallergic etiology compared to those with falsely negative systemic allergy assessment but may still need management for LAR.

Nasal eosinophilia and eosinophil peroxidase in children and adolescents with rhinitis

Background

Researchers have shown that eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) is a relatively accurate marker of eosinophilia and eosinophil activity. However, its use as a marker of eosinophilic inflammation in nasal secretions is limited because the diagnostic cutoff values of EPO for use as a one-time test for allergic diseases such as allergic rhinitis have not been established.

Purpose

To identify the correlation between nasal eosinophil count and EPO in children and adolescents with rhinitis.

Methods

We recruited patients <18 years of age with rhinitis for more than 2 weeks or more than 2 episodes a year whose nasal eosinophil and EPO were measured at a single allergy clinic. The eosinophil percentage was calculated by dividing the eosinophil count by the number of total cells under light microscopy at ×1,000 magnification. EPO and protein were measured from nasal secretions. We retrospectively analyzed the correlation between nasal eosinophils and protein-corrected EPO (EPO/protein) value.

Results

Of the 67 patients enrolled, 41 were male (61.2%); the mean age was 8.2±4.0 years. The median nasal eosinophil count was 1 and percentage was 1%. The median protein-corrected EPO value was 12.5 ng/μg (range, 0–31 ng/μg). There was a statistically significant correlation between eosinophil count and percentage (P<0.001). However, the eosinophil percentage and EPO did not correlate. The eosinophil count and EPO had a statistically significant correlation (P =0.01). The EPO cutoff value examined for nasal eosinophil counts of 2, 5, 10, and 20 was 17.57 ng/μg regardless of the reference count. The largest area under the curve value was obtained when the receiver operating characteristic curve was drawn using the eosinophil count of 2.

Conclusion

Nasal eosinophil count was significantly associated with protein-corrected EPO.

Endotypes of chronic rhinitis: A cluster analysis study

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinitis (CR) is currently regarded as a syndrome, which presents as several endotypes. The aim of this study was to identify the CR endotype clusters and investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different endotypes.

METHODS

A total of 259 CR patients and 20 control subjects were enrolled in this prospective study. Twelve clinical variables were analyzed using cluster analysis and five inflammatory variables were measured to investigate the inflammatory patterns associated with the different clusters.

RESULTS

Six endotype clusters of CR were defined in the Chinese CR patients. Patients in cluster 1 (38.6%) were diagnosed as allergic rhinitis (AR) without asthma, and in cluster 2 (13.5%) as AR with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils and high levels of local and serum IgE. Similarly, patients in cluster 3 (18.6%) were diagnosed as nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) without asthma and in cluster 5 (5.0%) as NARES with asthma, with all demonstrating positive results for local eosinophils, and negative results for both local and serum IgE. Patients in cluster 4 (4.6%) were diagnosed as local allergic rhinitis and showed positive results for local eosinophils and local IgE, but negative results for serum IgE, whereas patients in cluster 6 (19.7%) were diagnosed as idiopathic rhinitis because of high symptoms scores, but negative findings for local eosinophils, local IgE, and serum IgE.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese CR patients may be clustered into six endotypes with different inflammatory patterns, which may help in delivering individualized treatment.

Nasal eosinophilia in nasal smears of patients with persistent and intermittent allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophils are the principal effector cells involved in the pathogenesis of allergic rhinitis. Cell numbers increase in non-allergic rhinitis patients with eosinophilia, aspirin hypersensitivity and nasal polyposis, as well as in allergic rhinitis patients. Exfoliative nasal cytology can be used in the differential diagnosis of allergic rhinitis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate nasal eosinophilia in nasal smears of patients with mild, persistent and intermittent allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

The study comprised 60 patients with allergic rhinitis and 20 healthy volunteers. The patients were divided into intermittent and persistent allergic rhinitis groups. Nasal smear status, eosinophil numbers and Total Nasal Symptom Scores were compared.

RESULTS

Nasal smear results were pathological in 40 of 60 allergic rhinitis patients, which was significantly higher than the rate in controls. The mean nasal eosinophilia score was significantly higher in the intermittent allergic rhinitis than in the persistent allergic rhinitis group (p = 0.029). There was a positive correlation between nasal eosinophilia score and Total Nasal Symptom Score (r = 0.652; p < 0.05) in persistent allergic rhinitis and intermittent allergic rhinitis patients.

CONCLUSION

The nasal smear test is inexpensive, objective and simple to perform, and should be part of the diagnostic investigation.

Neusverstopping

Acute neusverstopping is een frequente aandoening. Meestal is het geen geïsoleerd symptoom, maar treedt zij gecombineerd op met andere klachten van de neus. In overgrote meerderheid is de oorzaak een virale infectie die vanzelf overgaat, en heeft verdere diagnostiek geen consequenties voor de therapie. Bij chronische klachten is verdere diagnostiek wel zinvol; een allergie of hyperreactiviteit is het meest waarschijnlijk. Bij chronische neusverstopping is aandacht voor chronisch gebruik van decongestieve neusdruppels van belang. Persisterende eenzijdige neusverstopping, zeker wanneer dit gepaard gaat met bloederige afscheiding, is een alarmsymptoom.

Allergic rhinitis and its associated co-morbidities at Bugando Medical Centre in Northwestern Tanzania; A prospective review of 190 cases

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is one of the commonest atopic diseases which contribute to significant morbidity world wide while its epidemiology in Tanzania remains sparse. There was paucity of information regarding allergic rhinitis in our setting; therefore it was important to conduct this study to describe our experience on allergic rhinitis, associated co-morbidities and treatment outcome in patients attending Bugando Medical Centre.

METHODS

This was descriptive cross-sectional study involving all patients with a clinical diagnosis of allergic rhinitis at Bugando Medical Centre over a three-month period between June 2011 and August 2011. Data was collected using a pre-tested coded questionnaire and analyzed using SPSS statistical computer software version 17.0.

RESULTS

A total of 190 patients were studied giving the prevalence of allergic rhinitis 14.7%. The median age of the patients was 8.5 years. The male to female ratio was 1:1. Adenoid hypertrophy, tonsillitis, hypertrophy of inferior turbinate, nasal polyps, otitis media and sinusitis were the most common co-morbidities affecting 92.6% of cases and were the major reason for attending hospital services. Sleep disturbance was common in children with adenoids hypertrophy (χ2 = 28.691, P = 0.000). Allergic conjunctivitis was found in 51.9%. The most common identified triggers were dust, strong perfume odors and cold weather (P < 0.05). Strong perfume odors affect female than males (χ2 = 4.583, P = 0.032). In this study family history of allergic rhinitis was not a significant risk factor (P =0.423). The majority of patients (68.8%) were treated surgically for allergic rhinitis co morbidities. Post operative complication and mortality rates were 2.9% and 1.6% respectively. The overall median duration of hospital stay of in-patients was 3 days (2 - 28 days). Most patients (98.4%) had satisfactory results at discharge.

CONCLUSION

The study shows that allergic rhinitis is common in our settings representing 14.7% of all otorhinolaryngology and commonly affecting children and adolescent. Sufferers seek medical services due to co-morbidities of which combination of surgical and medical treatment was needed. High index of suspicions in diagnosing allergic rhinitis and early treatment is recommended.

Nasal eosinophilia as a marker for allergic rhinitis: a controlled study of 50 patients

Eosinophils are the principal effector cells involved in the pathogenesis of allergic inflammation. We conducted a study to investigate the validity of the nasal smear examination for detecting eosinophilia in patients with allergic rhinitis. Our study group was made up of 50 patients with allergic rhinitis and 50 age- and sex-matched controls without allergic rhinitis. Smears were obtained from nasal secretions in both groups and then fixed, stained, and studied under light microscopy. Statistical analysis revealed that the odds ratio for eosinophilia positivity in nasal smears in the rhinitis group was 25.61 with a 95% confidence interval of 8 to 78. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of this test were 74, 90, 88, and 77%, respectively. We conclude that the nasal eosinophilia test is highly specific and moderately sensitive in diagnosing allergic rhinitis, and that it therefore can be used as an easy, noninvasive, and inexpensive procedure for screening patients and for conducting epidemiologic studies of this disorder.

Clinical characteristics of chronic rhinitis patients with high vs low irritant trigger burdens

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) often experience irritant-induced symptoms. The clinical relevance of the magnitude of their symptoms in response to these nonspecific stimuli remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the internal consistency and validity of an irritant index questionnaire (IIQ) and whether reclassification of physician-diagnosed rhinitis subtypes based on IIQ scores results in rhinitis subtypes with different clinical characteristics.

METHODS

Patients 18 to 65 years old with physician-diagnosed AR (n = 404), mixed rhinitis (MR; n = 129), or NAR (n = 123) completed an IIQ that rated rhinitis symptom severity in response to 21 nonallergic irritant triggers on a 1- to 10-point scale. Multistage sex-specific statistical analyses were performed using IIQ responses to reclassify physician-diagnosed AR, MR, and NAR into categories with high and low irritant burdens.

RESULTS

The IIQ demonstrated good internal consistency and cross-validation. After reclassification, 48% and 52% of patients with physician-diagnosed AR patients (n = 533) were categorized as having low-burden AR and high-burden AR, respectively, whereas 64% and 36% of NAR (n = 123) patients were categorized as having low-burden NAR and high-burden NAR, respectively. Reclassified high-burden AR and high-burden NAR patients were more likely to have a physician diagnosis of asthma and a greater number of self-reported rhinitis symptoms and perennial symptoms with seasonal exacerbations than reclassified low-burden AR and low-burden NAR patients, respectively (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

The IIQ resulted in significant reclassification of physician-diagnosed rhinitis patients into different diagnostic categories with unique clinical characteristics. Further studies are necessary to confirm the IIQ's utility as a tool for characterizing rhinitis patients in clinical practice and research.

Nasal eosinophilia can predict bronchial hyperresponsiveness in persistent rhinitis: evidence for united airways disease concept

BACKGROUND

Nasal eosinophils may be indicative of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) in rhinitis concerning the "united airways disease" theory. This study was designed to evaluate the relationship between nasal eosinophilia and BHR in persistent perennial rhinitis patients.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients (12 males and 25 females, mean age: 33.3 ± 10.4 years) were included in the study. Skin-prick test, nasal symptom score, nasal smears, methacholine bronchial challenge test, and nasal rhinometry were obtained in all patients. Eosinophil count in nasal smears was expressed as a percentage of the total cells. None of the patients had asthma.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the number of atopic and nonatopic patients having BHR (4/20 versus 4/17; chi-squared = 0.07; p > 0.05). Total nasal flow was lower and percentage of nasal eosinophils was higher in the patients with BHR than in patients without BHR (p = 0.012 and p = 0.009, respectively). A cutoff point of 68% nasal eosinophils yielded a sensitivity of 100% (63.1-100) and a specificity of 58.6% (38.9-76.5) to determine the presence of BHR. Positive likelihood ratio for the value of eosinophils above cutoff value was 2.42 (1.8-3.3).

CONCLUSION

This study shows the relationship between nasal eosinophils and BHR in persistent perennial rhinitis patients. Nasal eosinophil percentage below cutoff value indicates that a patient does not have BHR.

Cytological and tissue eosinophilia correlations in nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Eosinophils are possibly the most important inflammatory cells in the pathogenesis of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. Eosinophilic nasal mucosal infiltration is characteristic of nasal polyposis. The aim of this work was to study the possibility of correlations between cytological and tissue eosinophilia in patients with nasal polyposis and with the stage of the disease. If this correlation exists, nasal cytology will be very useful in diagnosis and management of patients with nasal polyposis.

METHODS

We studied 40 patients affected idiopathic nasal polyposis and 12 normal group controls. Qualitative measurements of eosinophils in nasal exudates and in tissue biopsy specimens were performed and the results were compared.

RESULTS

Nasal cytology and tissue biopsy showed a statistical correlation in the normal as well as in the pathological group. Clinical staging polyposis also correlated with cytological and tissue eosinophilia.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal cytological eosinophilia is a simple, fast, nontraumatic, and inexpensive method in the evaluation of patients with nasal polyposis. Eosinophilic infiltration of the nasal mucosa is characteristic of nasal polyposis. It correlates with the stage of the disease and tends to be higher in patients with asthma, nasal polyposis, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug intolerance (acetyl-salicylic acid triad).

14 Neusverstopping

Acute neusverstopping is een frequente aandoening. Meestal is het geen geïsoleerd symptoom, maar treedt zij gecombineerd op met andere klachten van de neus. In overgrote meerderheid is de oorzaak een virale infectie die vanzelf overgaat, en heeft verdere diagnostiek geen consequenties voor de therapie.

Bij chronische klachten is verdere diagnostiek wel zinvol; een allergie of hyperreactiviteit is het meest waarschijnlijk. Bij chronische neusverstopping is aandacht voor chronisch gebruik van decongestieve neusdruppels van belang. Persisterende eenzijdige neusverstopping, zeker wanneer dit gepaard gaat met bloederige afscheiding, is een alarmsymptoom.

Correlation Between Eosinophilia and Nasal Features in Allergic Rhinosinusitis

A characteristic feature of nasal allergy is local accumulation of inflammatory cells, particularly mast cells and eosinophils, and their mediators, which have been implicated to be responsible for symptoms and signs of allergies. This prospective study tested the hypothesis that severity of nasal symptoms at presentation was related to the presence of nasal eosinophilia, using consecutive patients with allergic rhinitis attending the outpatient Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria, between March and December 2008. Excluded were those who had commenced antihistamine and similar antiallergy drugs. Nasal eosinophilia, skin sensitivity, sinus radiograph, and clinical features were graded using standard classification. The study was composed of 49 subjects (28 males and 21 females). The subjects’ age ranged from 7 to 53 years (mean ± SD: 28 ± 4 years). Nasal eosinophilia and abnormal skin sensitivity response were seen in 41 (83.8%) and 37 (75.5%) subjects, respectively. Rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal obstruction constituted 42 (85.7%), 31 (63.3%), and 21 (42.9%), respectively, while inferior turbinate enlargement and radiological involvement were seen in 29 (59.2%) and 36 (73.5%) patients. The Spearman correlation test revealed a significant association between nasal smear eosinophilia and rhinorrhea (P = .008) and sneezing (P = .04), although there was no significant association with other variables. The authors conclude that the degree of nasal eosinophilia may be useful in predicting the severity of rhinorrhea and sneezing among the clinical features of nasal allergy.

Evaluation of nasal cytology in subjects with chronic rhinitis: a 7-year study

BACKGROUND

No diagnostic test had been specifically developed to diagnose nonallergic rhinitis (NAR). Also a negative nasal smear for eosinophils does not rule out the diagnosis. There is a significant diagnostic problem in patients with NAR. How can we solve this problem?

OBJECTIVES

Assessment of other cells than eosinophils present in the cytogram such as basophils, neutrophils, and goblet cells may help us to classify and management of diagnostic problem of rhinitis. We sought to characterize the cellular pattern of patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and compare them with those of NAR.

METHODS

According to the skin prick test positivity or negativity, individuals were divided into AR and NAR groups, respectively. Allergic rhinitis group was further divided into seasonal, perennial, and mixed subgroups. Nonallergic rhinitis group was also divided into the following 5 subgroups according to the nasal smear cytologic result: basophilic, neutrophilic, eosinophilic, mixed, and nonallergic noninfectious type. So the frequency rates of the subgroups were calculated and also smear cytologic results were compared.

RESULTS

Frequency of AR was approximately equal to NAR in subjects with chronic rhinitis. Neutrophilic, eosinophilic, mixed, and nonallergic noninfectious types were the common types of NAR. An evident nasal eosinophilia was found in AR and eosinophilic NAR, whereas a higher percentage of goblet cells were determined in nonallergic noninfectious rhinitis. There is no significant difference between cytologic results from NAR and AR patients.

CONCLUSION

In the patient with positive skin test result, the presence of nasal eosinophilia strongly supports the diagnosis of AR. No diagnostic test had been specifically developed to diagnose chronic NAR. Also, a negative nasal smear for eosinophils does not rule out the diagnosis. Assessment of other cells present in the cytogram such as basophils, neutrophils, and goblet cells may also provide valuable information for differential diagnosis and management of these conditions.

Isolation and phenotypic characterization of mucosal nasal lymphocytes by direct ex vivo analysis

Cellular inflammation of the nasal mucosa demonstrates a local immune response which plays an important role in allergic rhinitis. The aim of the present study was to characterize nasal mucosal lymphocytes regarding their activation and differentiation state by direct ex vivo flowcytometric analysis. Lymphocytes from the inferior turbinates were isolated by a mechanical method of preparation and, for comparison, from peripheral blood by Ficoll gradient centrifugation. Patients suffering from rhinitis or difficulty in nasal breathing were divided into an allergic (pollen-allergy, n = 13) and non-allergic group (n = 24). Expression of different T- and B-cell markers was determined by flowcytometric analysis. CD4+ T-cells from the nasal mucosa exhibited a memory phenotype (CD45RO+, 97%), were highly activated (CD69+, 43-73%), and showed low expression of the cutaneous lymphocyte antigen (CLA+, 5%). Nasal CD20+ B-lymphocytes expressed significantly higher levels of mIgE and lower levels of CD23 and CD80 than peripheral B-cells. Subsets of CD80+ (4%) and CD86+ (6%) CD20+ B-lymphocytes were identified in the nasal mucosa. No significant differences between allergic and non-allergic individuals were determined. As expected, the data show profound phenotypical differences between circulating peripheral blood and nasal mucosal lymphocytes. Activated memory lymphocytes are present in the nasal mucosa from allergic, but also non-allergic patients and may indicate to a significant role of a local inflammatory state without systemic criteria for allergy. In our study, we show that direct ex vivo isolation of lymphocytes is practicable method and offers a new technique to examine the local nasal allergic immune response using a multiparametric phenotypical analysis.

Nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome

Nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES) is a clinical syndrome comprising symptoms consistent with allergic rhinitis in which an absence of atopy has been demonstrated by allergen skin testing, and nasal cytology analysis demonstrates more than 20% eosinophils. Anosmia is a prominent feature not shared with allergic rhinitis. The pathophysiology of NARES is poorly understood, but a key component involves a self-perpetuating, chronic eosinophilic nasal inflammation with development of nasal micropolyposis and polyposis. Mast cells likely play an important role as well. NARES is a risk factor for the development of nasal polyposis and aspirin sensitivity, as well as obstructive sleep apnea. Treatment consists mainly of intranasal corticosteroids with or without the addition of second-generation antihistamines and/or leukotriene-receptor antagonists.

Prevalence of allergic rhinitis and nasal smear eosinophilia in 11- to 15 yr-old children in Shiraz

Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition among schoolchildren. The prevalence rate of AR differs among countries and even among regions within the same country. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of nasal symptoms and signs of AR and nasal smear eosinophilia in 11- to 15-yr-old children in Shiraz. A total of 4584 children aged 11-15 yr of both sexes were surveyed from May 1995 to April 1996, and nasal symptoms and signs of AR (sneezing, rhinorrhea, nasal blockage, itching, color change, mucosal swelling, nasal wetness, and nasal crease), based on questionnaire and ear, nose and throat (ENT) examination were recorded. In addition, smears were taken from nasal secretions and stained. The results compared with nasal smears related to 340 healthy children. 1008 (22%) schoolchildren had nasal symptoms of AR (based on the questionnaire), 445 (9.7%) were identified as having nasal symptoms and signs of AR (based on the questionnaire and ENT specialist examination), and 226 (5.8%) had nasal symptoms and signs of AR associated with nasal eosinophilia (based on the questionnaire, ENT specialist examination and positive nasal smear for eosinophilia). Nasal eosinophilia was present in 274 (62%) children with nasal symptoms and signs of AR. This survey showed that prevalence of nasal symptoms and signs of AR was high in schoolchildren in Shiraz. Nasal smear eosinophilia had a diagnostic specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 62% and seems to be a potentially valuable test for AR.

In vitro diagnosis of chronic nasal inflammation

BACKGROUND

Differential diagnosis of chronic nasal inflammation is insufficient when based solely on clinical examination and radiography of paranasal sinuses. Patients complain about more or less similar symptoms. Activation of mast cells and eosinophils is pivotal in nasal inflammation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare tryptase and eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) in nasal secretions in different forms of chronic nasal inflammation and to establish norm values.

METHODS

The study included 1710 patients presenting with nasal complaints. Nasal secretions were gained by the cotton wool method and analysed for tryptase, as a marker of mast cell activation, and for ECP, as a marker of tissue eosinophilia and activation. Patients were grouped according to their diagnosis: chronic, non-allergic rhinosinusitis (sinusitis, n=194), non-allergic nasal polyposis (polyposis, n=138), non-allergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES, n=198), isolated perennial allergic rhinitis (AR) (n=126), isolated seasonal AR (n=132), and patients allergic to both, seasonal and perennial allergens (n=193). Seven hundred and twenty-nine patients with nasal complaints due to a deviated septum and without any nasal inflammation served as controls.

RESULTS

Nasal tryptase was highly significantly (P<0.001) elevated in polyposis, NARES, and in AR. ECP was highly significantly (P<0.001) elevated in all groups of patients suffering from chronic nasal inflammation. Based on our data and method we established norm values (95% confidence interval of mean value) for nasal tryptase in healthy adults, ranging from 12.0 to 18.7 ng/mL and for ECP ranging from 84.4 to 102.6 ng/mL.

CONCLUSION

Mast cells and eosinophils are involved in non-allergic and allergic forms of chronic nasal inflammation. We established an in vitro assay for tryptase and ECP in nasal secretions and defined norm values based on our data and method. In vitro measurement of biological markers in nasal secretions provides important information for differential diagnosis and therapeutic strategies of chronic nasal inflammation.

Non-allergic rhinitis: diagnosis and management

Patients in the rhinitis clinic with negative skin prick tests present a challenge. Non-allergic rhinitis consists of a variety of conditions including infection, hormonal changes, drugs and autonomic dysfunction. There is also a range of systemic disorders to be considered. The pathogeneses of many of these are less well understood than that of allergic rhinitis, diagnosis and treatment pathways are also more complex. A detailed accurate history needs to be taken followed by relevant investigations which may include allergen challenge, because skin prick and RAST-negative allergic rhinitis is now recognised. Nitric oxide levels may prove helpful: elevated levels suggest inflammation, very low levels indicate the possibility of primary ciliary dyskinesia or cystic fibrosis. Treatment is of the underlying cause when found: for those without obvious pathology a trial of combined therapy with topical corticosteroids plus antihistamine or plus anti-cholinergic may be worth while. A complex inter-relationship between allergic and infectious rhinitis is becoming apparent.

Intranasal fluticasone propionate is effective for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without eosinophilia

BACKGROUND

Although response to intranasal corticosteroid therapy has been reported in patients with nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilic syndrome (NARES), efficacy specifically in non-NARES patients has not been fully characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of intranasal fluticasone propionate (FP) in the treatment of patients with perennial nonallergic rhinitis, with and without nasal eosinophilia.

METHODS

Data from 983 patients in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PNAR trials were integrated. Patients received a total daily dose of FP 200 microg (n = 332), FP 400 microg (n = 325), or placebo (n = 326) for 28 days. Patients were > or =12 years of age with perennial rhinitis and negative skin tests to all allergens relevant to the geographic region. Nasal eosinophils were evaluated using a five-point scale. Patients were classified as non-NARES with a point score of 0 (n = 674; 69%); patients with a point score between I and 4 were classified as NARES (n = 309; 31%). Efficacy of FP was evaluated by the mean change in total nasal symptom score (TNSS), a sum of patient ratings of nasal obstruction, postnasal drip, and rhinorrhea.

RESULTS

Patients with either NARES or non-NARES had similar statistically significant improvement with FP 200 microg or 400 microg compared with placebo; thus, the total group comprising both varieties of rhinitis responded to FP. In the total population, both FP treatment groups showed significantly greater improvement in TNSS compared with placebo during each week of treatment (P < or = 0.002), with mean changes in TNSS for day 22 to day 28 ranging from -84 and -85 in the FP 200 microg and FP 400 microg groups, respectively, to -64 in the placebo group. The three study treatment groups had similar proportions of non-NARES (68 to 69%) and NARES (31 to 32%) patients at baseline. In the non-NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for each treatment group were similar to changes seen in the total population. In the NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for the FP 200 microg and placebo groups were similar to changes seen in the total population; mean change in TNSS for the FP 400 microg group was somewhat greater than changes seen in the total population.

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal FP is an effective treatment for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without nasal eosinophilia (NARES or non-NARES).

Evidence for an inflammatory pathophysiology in idiopathic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

The pathophysiology of idiopathic rhinitis is unknown but the disease is classified as being non-allergic on the basis of negative serum IgE radioallergosorbent assay (RAST) and skin prick tests. In contrast, allergic rhinitis has a Th2 type inflammatory pathology mediated by IgE and mast cells.

OBJECTIVE

To test the null hypothesis that there would be no difference in the cellular infiltrate for key Th2-associated inflammatory cells between allergic and idiopathic rhinitis.

METHODS

We applied strict selection criteria in the recruitment of allergic and idiopathic rhinitis cases. In contrast to previous studies which used cytology or small biopsies, we studied all layers of the mucosa by using whole, full-thickness nasal turbinate specimens with an average length of 2.5 cm. Immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization techniques were used to compare the distribution and cell populations of mast cells, IgE positive (IgE+) cells, eosinophils and plasma cells in perennial allergic (n = 11) and idiopathic (n = 17) rhinitis, and control nasal mucosal tissue (n = 9).

RESULTS

Mast cells and IgE+ cells were significantly increased within the epithelium of allergic and idiopathic mucosa compared to normal mucosa (P < 0.05). More IgE+ cells were present in the allergic group compared to the idiopathic group with the majority of IgE+ cells being mast cells. Both rhinitic groups showed increased eosinophilia localized to the superficial submucosa compared to normal mucosa (P < 0.05). More plasma cells were present in the allergic rhinitic tissue.

CONCLUSION

Idiopathic and allergic rhinitic mucosa show similarities in their inflammatory infiltrate suggesting that both groups share a highly localized Th2, IgE-mediated cellular immunopathology.