Is there a role for aerosol nasal sprays in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a white paper.

This White Paper presents the Consensus Statements derived from a Special Issues Board (SIB) held in Chicago, IL, in October 2010. The SIB was convened to address the question of whether there is a need for both aerosol and aqueous intranasal steroids (INSs) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). The faculty reviewed the published record of efficacy and safety of aerosol and aqueous INSs, as well as patient and physician satisfaction and preferences for currently available INSs, and burden of disease. Agreement on unmet needs also included the practice experience of the faculty and their colleagues. The body of evidence indicates that INSs are equally effective and well tolerated for most patients. However, differences exist among current aqueous formulations as well as between these products and their aerosol antecedents, based on the properties of the nasal spray. Aerosol formulations, although no longer available, may be preferred for some patients with specific pathophysiology and may be preferred by some patients based on sensory perception. There are good reasons to expand the currently available options of INSs by having both aerosol and aqueous formulations.

Transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic approach for the treatment of sportsman's hernia.

BACKGROUND: Groin pain in athletes presents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge, particularly in distinguishing between those that will respond to nonoperative management and those that require surgery. Repair of sportsman's hernia, using the Modified Bassini darn or tension-free Lictenstein mesh technique, have been well described. The aim of this study was to assess the role of laparoscopy in the management of these hernias. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventeen consecutive male patients (median age, 27 years), presenting with symptoms and signs of sportsman's hernia to a district general hospital were reviewed. Five patients presented with unilateral groin pain, whereas 12 had bilateral symptoms. All patients underwent a diagnostic laparoscopy, followed by transabdominal preperitoneal polypropelene mesh (15 x 10 cm) repair. All patients except 1 were discharged within 24 hours of surgery, and their rehabilitation was supervised by a single physiotherapist. All patients were assessed postoperatively by the authors and at a median follow-up of 23 weeks. RESULTS: The laparoscopy confirmed posterior wall weakness in all patients with bilateral symptoms and in 4 of 5 patients with unilateral groin pain. Following repair, no surgical morbidity occurred and the median return to sporting activities was 42 days. All but 1 patient returned to the level of sport reached prior to injury, and mild pain was experienced in 5 groins, which did not interfere with either normal daily or sports activity. CONCLUSION: The transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic approach is safe and feasible in the diagnosis and treatment of Sportsman's hernia, enabling a full return to sports activities.

Allergy and the contemporary laryngologist.

The author believes that allergy plays an important role in the field of laryngology. Not every patient has significant allergic problems, but the allergic factor in laryngeal problems should not be underestimated. The insights and technology for research have never been better. Many cause-and-effect relationships have been suggested and often provide the working basis for current therapeutics. Many current models of operation need to be verified, explored further, and modified through research. It is hoped that new technologies will achieve a higher degree of sensitivity without sacrificing specificity. Better specificity is particularly needed in allergy testing and in testing thyroid and pulmonary function. The author hopes that the contemporary laryngologist/otolaryngologist will use this overview to formulate a complete and orderly approach to laryngeal problems. Because of the complexity of laryngeal problems, referral to other specialists may be necessary. The laryngologist, however, should be able to orchestrate the appropriate use of technologies and health care specialists to address these problems.

The use of an ex vivo contrast study at the time of surgery to confirm the site of a perforated jejunal diverticulum.

A 63-year-old patient was diagnosed with acute jejunal diverticulitis and possible perforation. The patient was taken to the operating room for an exploratory laparotomy where a suspected segment of small bowel was resected. However, the surgical team was unsure whether the resected segment was the definite location of the perforation. A novel technique; using intraoperative contrast enhanced ex vivo x-ray photographs aided the surgical team in finding the exact location of the perforation and thus allowing the operating team to confidently and safely proceed with closure of the abdomen.

Comparative study of sensory attributes of two antihistamine nasal sprays: olopatadine 0.6% and azelastine 0.1%.

Allergic rhinitis is a chronic, allergen-induced inflammatory reaction. Patients often differentiate intranasal treatments based on sensory attributes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensory attributes of olopatadine HCl nasal spray 0.6% (OLO) relative to azelastine HCl nasal spray 0.1% (AZE). This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, crossover comparison of OLO versus AZE in adult, symptomatic patients with at least a 2-year history of allergic rhinitis. Patients received each of the treatments separately with a washout between exposures, evaluated their sensory perceptions immediately after and 45 minutes postdosing with each treatment, and evaluated their perceptions of the two medications after administering both therapies. The mean age of the 110 patients was 42.4 years; 67% were women. OLO was superior to AZE in overall aftertaste (60.6% versus 30.3%; p = 0.0005), patient preference (62.4% versus 33.9%; p = 0.0001), and likelihood of extended use (60.9% versus 34.5%; p = 0.0004). OLO was superior to AZE in perceptions of immediate taste (1.9 U versus 3.2 U, respectively; p < 0.0001). Perceptions of additional attributes after administration of both treatments were significant and favored OLO (p < or = 0.0036 for all variables). In these assessments, respectively, 54.1 and 32.1% of patients favored the taste and smell of OLO compared with 27.5 and 11.9% who favored AZE. Both treatments were well tolerated. The sensory attributes of OLO are superior to AZE in terms of immediate taste postdosing, overall aftertaste, overall patient preference, and likelihood of use. This outcome could lead to greater patient compliance and improved treatment effect.