Cefalea rinogénica causada por mucopiocele en concha bullosa, un origen infrecuente. Reporte de caso / Rhinogenic headache caused by concha bullosa mucopyocele, an unusual origin. Case Report

Introducción: la cefalea rinogénica es secundaria al contacto permanente de la mucosa nasal y puede ser secundario a concha bullosa, si se infecta puede ser mucocele o mucopiocele. Caso clínico: paciente de 34 años con cefalea hemicraneal izquierda, dolor periocular ipsilateral, congestión y rinorrea hialina con cambios en consistencia y coloración del moco. En la tomografía computarizada (TAC) de senos paranasales (SPN) desviación septal derecha por concha bullosa izquierda, ocupación de líquido. Se sospecho mucocele y cefalea rinogénica secundaria, prueba de lidocaína positiva. Se detecto por cultivo, Eikenella corrodens. Manejo con antibiótico y posterior resolución de patología. Conclusiones: debe incluirse en el diagnóstico diferencial de cefalea y concha bullosa, realizarse endoscopia nasal y TAC de SPN. El manejo quirúrgico ha demostrado reducir la intensidad y la frecuencia de la cefalea a corto y largo plazo, y es exitoso si hay test de lidocaína positivo.

Introduction: rhinogenic headache is secondary to permanent contact with the nasal mucosa and may be secondary to concha bullosa, if infected it may be mucocele or mucopiocele. Clinical case: 34-year-old patient with left hemicranial headache, ipsilateral periocular pain, congestion, and hyaline rhinorrhea with changes in consistency and coloration of the mucus. In the computed tomography (CT) of the paranasal sinuses (SPN) right septal deviation due to left concha bullosa, fluid occupation. Mucocele and secondary rhinogenic headache were suspected, lidocaine test positive. Eikenella corrodens was detected by culture. Management with antibiotics and subsequent resolution of pathology. Conclusions: nasal endoscopy and SPN CT should be included in the differential diagnosis of headache and concha bullosa. Surgical management has been shown to reduce headache intensity and frequency in the short and long term, and is successful if there is a positive lidocaine test.

Guía de práctica clínica para el tratamiento de la rinosinusitis crónica: versión completa / Clinical practice guideline for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis: full version

La rinosinusitis (RS) se define como la inflamación de la nariz y los senos paranasales con dos o más síntomas como bloqueo/obstrucción/congestión o secreción nasal (goteo nasal anterior/posterior) más dolor/presión facial y/o reducción o pérdida del sentido del olfato. Adicional, se tienen en cuenta los hallazgos objetivos como la presencia de pólipos nasales y/o descarga mucopurulenta en meato medio y/o edema u obstrucción de la mucosa en el meato medio en la endoscopia nasal. Se pueden considerar o no, los cambios tomográficos como cambios mucosos en el complejo osteomeatal y la mucosa de los senos paranasales. Se reconoce que los síntomas tienen alta sensibilidad, pero baja especificidad, de ahí la necesidad de hallazgos objetivos.

Rhinosinusitis (RS) is defined as inflammation of the nose and sinuses with two or more symptoms such as blockage/obstruction/congestion or nasal discharge. with two or more symptoms such as nasal blockage/obstruction/congestion or nasal discharge (anterior/posterior runny nose) plus facial pain/pressure and/or reduction or loss of the sense of smell. sense of smell. In addition, objective findings such as the presence of nasal polyps and/or nasal presence of nasal polyps and/or mucopurulent discharge from the middle meatus and/or edema or mucosal obstruction or mucosal obstruction in the middle meatus on nasal endoscopy. Tomographic changes may or may not tomographic changes may or may not be considered as mucosal changes in the osteomeatal complex and mucosal osteomeatal complex and the mucosa of the paranasal sinuses. It is recognized that the symptoms symptoms have high sensitivity but low specificity, hence the need for objective findings. findings.

Systematic review and Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules in treatment of influenza / 中国中药杂志

This study aims to systematically review the efficacy and safety of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules in the treatment of influenza. The randomized controlled trial(RCT) of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules alone or in combination with conventional western medicine for treating influenza were retrieved from PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and ClinicalTrails.gov. The data analysis was performed in RevMan 5.4.1. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the involved RCT, and GRADEpro GDT to assess the quality of the evidence. A total of 11 RCTs involving 1 836 patients were included in this study. Compared with conventional western medicine, Shufeng Jiedu Capsules/Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine improved the response rate(RR=1.09, 95%CI[1.03, 1.15], P=0.002), shortened the time to relief of cough, and increased the 3-day sore throat relief rate, whereas there was no significant difference in the time to fever abatement, the time to relief of sore throat, 3-day cough relief rate, or 3-day runny nose relief rate. Subgroup-analysis showed that Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine improved the response rate(RR=1.11, 95%CI[1.08, 1.15], P<0.000 01), shortened the time to relief of cough, and increased the 3-day relief rate of symptoms(cough, sore throat, and runny nose) compared with conventional western medicine alone, while there was no significant difference in the time to fever abatement or the time to relief of sore throat. Shufeng Jiedu Capsules alone could not improve the response rate(RR=0.97, 95%CI[0.93, 1.02], P=0.19). In addition, Shufeng Jiedu Capsules/Shufeng Jiedu Capsules + conventional western medicine vs conventional western medicine were no significant difference in adverse reactions(RR=0.98, 95%CI[0.57, 1.69], P=0.95). The available evidence suggests that Shufeng Jiedu Capsules is effective and safe in the treatment of influenza, and the combination of Shufeng Jiedu Capsules with conventional western medicine can accelerate the relief of symptoms. However, since the number and quality of the included studies were low, the above findings remained to be further verified by multicenter RCT with large sample sizes.

A multi-center observation of the therapeutic efficacy of Bencycloquidium bromide in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis with predominant symptoms of rhinorrhea / 临床耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志

Objective:To observe the efficacy and safety of the M receptor antagonist Bencycloquidium bromide nasal spray in treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis with runny nose as the main symptom. Methods:From August 2021 to September 2021, 134 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were enrolled in the otolaryngology Outpatient Department of Peking University Third Hospital, First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University and China-Japanese Friendship Hospital of Jilin University, including 71 males and 63 females, with a median age of 38 years. TNSS score and visual analogue scale（VAS） of total nasal symptoms were observed during 2 weeks of treatment with Bencycloquidium bromide nasal spray. Results:TNSS score decreased from （8.89±3.31） on day 0 to （3.71±2.51） on day 14（P<0.001）, VAS score of nasal symptoms decreased from （24.86±7.40） on day 0 to （6.84±5.94） on day 14（P<0.001）, VAS score of rhinorrhoea decreased from （6.88±2.06） on day 0 to （1.91±1.81） on day 14（P<0.001）. Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire（RQLQ） score decreased from （94.63±33.35） on day 0 to （44.95±32.28） on day 14（P<0.001）. The incidence of adverse reaction was low and no serious adverse events occurred during the whole experiment. Conclusion:Bencycloquidium bromide nasal spray has significant efficacy and good safety in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Apport de l'imagerie dans les brèches ostéoméningées de l'étage antérieur de la base du crâne / Role of imaging in the osteo-dural defects of the anterior base of the skull

Décrire les caractéristiques radiologiques de la brèche ostéo-méningée (BOM) de l'étage antérieur de la base du crâne. Méthodes: Etude rétrospective, descriptive, monocentrique, colligeant les patients hospitalisés pour prise en charge d'une brèche ostéoméningée (BOM) et explorés par le couple TDM/IRM, du 1er janvier 2012 au 31 Décembre 2021. Résultats: Ont été retenu 23 patients avec un âge moyen de 48 ans et un sex ratio de 0,3. Des antécédents de chirurgie nasosinusienne ou de neurochirurgie ont été notés chez deux patients (9 %). Treize patients (57 %) étaient victimes de traumatisme crânien. Une rhinoliquorrhée était retrouvée dans 21 cas (persistante dans trois cas (12%) et intermittente dans 18 cas (76%)). La découverte de la BOM a été faite suite à une méningite dans quatre cas. Le dosage de la bêta trace a confirmé la présence de LCR chez deux patients. La TDM a confirmé le diagnostic chez 12 patients dont deux patients qui ne présentaient pas de rhinoliquorrhée à l'examen clinique. Elle a aussi permis d'établir le bilan topographique dans ces cas. Elle a suspecté une BOM dans 9 cas et était négative dans deux cas. L'IRM a confirmé le diagnostic dans tous les cas et a permis de: localiser le siège de la fuite de LCR dans les brèches multiples, confirmer le diagnostic deméningoencéphalocèle (trois cas) et objectiver des signes indirects d'hypertension intra-crânienne (HTIC) (quatre cas). Conclusion: L'imagerie en coupes permet de localiser la BOM mais nécessite souvent, une approche par étapes et son interprétation exige une connaissance approfondie de l'anatomie normale et des variantes de la base du crâne. Mots-clés: Liquorrhée, Brèche Ostéoméningée, Chirurgie, TDM, IRM

The efficacy and safety of glucocorticoid stent implantation compared with oral glucocorticoid during perioperative period in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps / 临床耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志

Objective:To compare the perioperative efficacy and safety of postoperative oral glucocorticoid and glucocorticoid stent implantation in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps（CRSwNP） undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery（FESS）. Methods:Sixty patients with bilateral CRSwNP with similar degree of lesions were selected and divided into three groups: conventional surgical treatment group（20 cases）, glucocorticoid stent group（20 cases）, and oral glucocorticoid group（20 cases）. All three groups underwent routine FESS, patients in the sinus glucocorticoid stent group receiving sinus glucocorticoid stent placed in the ethmoid sinuses（one on each side） during surgery, and patients in the oral glucocorticoid group received postoperative oral methylprednisolone at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg per day for 7 days, followed by a tapering of 8 mg per week to 8 mg followed by maintenance therapy for 1 week, for a total of 3-4 weeks. Visual analog scale（VAS） scores were used to evaluate nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, olfaction, and facial pressure symptoms before surgery, as well as at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery. Nasal endoscopic Lund-Kennedy scores were recorded, and adverse reactions such as stent detachment, stent-related allergic reactions, sleep disorders, edema, gastrointestinal symptoms, rash/acne, behavioral/cognitive changes, weight gain, limb pain, and infection risk were documented. Results:The nasal congestion symptom scores at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery were significantly lower than those before operationin all three groups, and the differences were statistically significant（P<0.05）. The sinus glucocorticoid stent group exhibited significantly lower nasal congestion symptom scores at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery compared to the conventional surgical treatment group. The rhinorrhea symptom scores at 2, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery were significantly lower than preoperative scores in all three groups. Additionally, the sinus glucocorticoid stent group had significantly lower rhinorrhea scores than the conventional surgical treatment group at 2 weeks postoperatively. Concerning olfaction, the sinus glucocorticoid stent group showed a significant reduction in scores at 12 weeks postoperatively, while the oral glucocorticoid group exhibited significant improvement starting from 8 weeks after surgery. There were no statistically significant differences in nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, facial pressure, and olfaction scores between the sinus glucocorticoid stent and oral glucocorticoid groups at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks postoperatively. Nasal endoscopy scores revealed lower polyp scores and edema at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks postoperatively for all three groups compared to preoperative scores. The conventional surgical treatment group exhibited a significant reduction in nasal secretion scores starting from 8 weeks after surgery, while both the sinus glucocorticoid stent and oral glucocorticoid groups showed significant reductions starting from 2 weeks postoperatively, with scores significantly lower than those of the conventional surgical treatment group at 2 weeks. Scab/scar scores in the conventional surgical treatment group significantly decreased from 8 weeks after surgery, while both the sinus glucocorticoid stent and oral glucocorticoid groups exhibited significant reductions starting from 4 weeks. No statistically significant differences were observed in endoscopy scores（including polyps, edema, nasal secretion, scars, and scabs） between the sinus glucocorticoid stent and oral glucocorticoid groups at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks postoperatively. Regarding adverse reactions, no postoperative complications related to sinus glucocorticoid stent were observed in the sinus glucocorticoid stent group. In the oral glucocorticoid group,1 patient experienced irritability, and 1 patient experienced weight gain. Conclusion:The glucocorticoid stent implantation has comparable effects to oral glucocorticoid in improving postoperative nasal symptoms, reducing nasal mucosal edema, scar formation, and nasal secretion in patients with CRSwNP undergoing FESS, with a better safety profile.

Contribuição da tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico no diagnóstico da rinolitíase assintomática / Contribution of cone beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of asymptomatic rhinolithiasis

Rinolitíase é uma formação calcárea rara situada no interior das fossas nasais. Geralmente apresenta-se acompanhada de rinorréia purulenta e obstrução nasal. Porém, outros sintomas como epistaxe recorrente e cacosmia podem estar presentes. O diagnóstico é realizado por meio de exames nasais endoscópicos e tomografia computadorizada (TC) associados à alta suspeita clínica. O tratamento consiste na sua remoção e antibioticoterapia. Neste artigo os autores descrevem o caso de um rinolito de grandes dimensões, assintomático, em indivíduo do gênero masculino, 17 anos, descoberto em exame de tomografia de feixe cônico realizada após observação de uma radiografia panorâmica.

Rhinolithiasis is a rare calcareous formation located within the nasal fossae. It is usually accompanied by purulent rhinorrhea and nasal obstruction. However, other symptoms such as recurrent epistaxis and cacosmia may be present. The diagnosis is made through endoscopic nasal exams and computed tomography (CT) associated with high clinical suspicion. The treatment consists of its removal and antibiotic therapy. In this paper, the authors describe the case of a large, asymptomatic, rhinolith in a 17-year-old male, discovered on a conical beam tomography scan performed after a routine panoramic radiograph

Provocation test with 5% glycerol has fast and fleeting effects on the nasal mucosa / Teste de provocação com glicerol 5%: efeito rápido e fugaz na mucosa nasal

The effects observed with nasal provocation testing using 5% glycerol were associated only with irritation/burning sensation within the first few minutes, reducing spontaneously and disappearing quickly. The use of 5% glycerol was found to have no influence on the prevalence of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing and nasal/ocular itching obtained through summing symptoms, as evaluated in different nasal provocation tests, after 15-20 minutes. Overall, dilution with 5% glycerol did not change the final score for symptoms during nasal provocation testing.

Os efeitos observados com glicerol a 5% na provocação nasal foram associados unicamente a irritação e sensação de prurido nos primeiros minutos, cedendo espontaneamente e desaparecendo rapidamente. O uso de glicerol a 5% não influenciou a prevalência de obstrução nasal, rinorreia, espirros e prurido nasal e ocular obtidos na soma dos sintomas, quando avaliado em diferentes testes de provocação nasal específica, após 15-20 minutos. Tomada em conjunto, essa diluição com glicerol a 5% não altera a pontuação final dos sintomas durante a provocação nasal.