Topical anaesthesia and decongestion in rhinology.

Topical anaesthesia and decongestion of the sinonasal mucosa are used commonly in rhinology practice to facilitate nasal endoscopy, as well as debridement and biopsies. Topical agents used for sinonasal anaesthesia include lignocaine, tetracaine and cocaine. Unlike lignocaine and tetracaine, cocaine also has a decongestant effect. Phenylephrine, oxymetazoline, xylometazoline or adrenaline are usually added to lignocaine and tetracaine to provide decongestion. Several studies have been performed seeking to identify the optimal nasal preparation for nasal endoscopy in the clinic setting. However, there remains no clear consensus in the literature resulting in ongoing wide variation between anaesthetic-decongestant preparations used in clinical practice. Indeed, some authors have argued that no anaesthetic is required at all for flexible nasendoscopy despite the apparent consensus that nasal instrumentation is generally uncomfortable, inferred by the persistence of ongoing research in this area. This review provides a practical summary of local anaesthetic and decongestant pharmacology as it relates to rhinologic practice and summarises the literature to date, with the goal of identifying current gaps in the literature and guiding future research efforts.

Decongestants, proton pump inhibitors, and systemic antibiotics are associated with an increased occurrence of dysbiosis.

BACKGROUND: Dysbiosis (also called dysbacteriosis) is characterized by a disruption of the microbiome, resulting in an imbalance in the microbiota, changes in their functional composition and metabolic activities, and a shift in their local distribution. Dysbiosis is most commonly reported as a condition affecting the gastrointestinal tract, for example with bacterial or fungal overgrowth in the small intestine. Known causes of dysbiosis include antibiotic use, liver disease, and alcohol misuse. AIMS: To determine those variables associated with the diagnosis of dysbiosis using a national database containing data supplied by general practitioners in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient data for the period January 2005 to December 2018 were obtained from the Disease Analyzer database (IQVIA) based on data from 1,193 general practices in Germany. Inclusion criteria were all adult patients (≥ 18 years) with an initial diagnosis of dysbiosis documented anonymously. Data for variables such as drug treatment, other diseases etc. associated with the diagnosis were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 4,013 patients diagnosed with dysbiosis and a comparative control cohort of 4,013 patients without such a dysbiosis were included in the study. The mean age in both groups was ~ 50 years where 65.2% of subjects were women. Decongestants and other nasal preparations for topical use (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.14 - 1.85), proton pump inhibitors (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.21 - 1.61), and systemic antibiotics (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.13 - 1.47) were significantly associated with an increased occurrence of dysbiosis, whereas non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.69 - 0.87), lipid-lowering drugs (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63 - 0.93), and ACE inhibitors (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.53 - 0.77) were associated with a decreased occurrence of dysbiosis. CONCLUSION: The study provides evidence that treatment with decongestants and other nasal preparations is strongly associated with an increased occurrence of dysbiosis. Although the pathophysiology of dysbiosis is multifactorial and confounding factors cannot be ruled out, the close correlation seen may have clinical significance.

Quality of life after radio frequency ablation turbinate reduction (RFATR) among patients with rhinitis medicamentosa & withdrawal from decongestant topical spray abuse.

OBJECTIVE: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) reliefs nasal obstruction and improves quality of life (QoL) in patients suffering from inferior turbinate hypertrophy (ITH). A substantial benefit was noted among patients suffering from Rhinitis Medicamentosa (RM), enabling ending decongestant spray abuse. Our aim was to establish the benefit from RFA with respect to QoL in patients suffering from ITH, due to the presence of RM. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Prospective Cohort study, including patients suffering from ITH undergoing RFA between 9.2017 and 9.2019 in Tel Aviv Medical Center. The cohort was divided to RM and non-RM (including allergic, non-allergic) patients. The differences between the groups were compared before and after RFA, and included patients' complaints, clinical findings and QoL questionnaires (SNOT-22 & NOSE). In the RM group, the ability to wean from decongestants was also described. RESULTS: Our data demonstrated subjective QoL improvement following RFA (88.9 %, N = 90). All RM patients withdrawaled from nasal decongestant spray. NOSE questionnaire demonstrated a significant improvement in QoL after RFA in the RM group (PV = 0.025). SNOT-22 did not demonstrate significant difference in QoL between RM and the reference group (PV = 0.1). Rates of MCID>8.3 were high, without significant difference between the groups (PV = 0.2). CONCLUSION: RFA demonstrated effectiveness in achieving of withdrawal from decongestant spray in RM patients and may be a possible definitive treatment option for this group. The nasal obstruction component in SNOT-22 questionnaire & NOSE questionnaire showed improved QoL in comparison to controls. High QoL after RFA was established in our entire cohort.

Rhinomanometry with and without decongestant used to select children for adenoidectomy: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Adenoid hypertrophy may coexist, and often does, with rhinitis. Therefore, in some cases, adenoidectomy alone, despite the fact that it reduces nasal resistance, may be insufficient to restore nasal breathing. Juliusson et al. suggested using rhinomanometry with and without nasal decongestant as a method for selecting patients for adenoidectomy. In this study, we aim to assess whether the decongestant test, when using normative data, is useful to select children for adenoidectomy. METHODS: Children between 4 and 15 years old undergoing adenoidectomy were selected from two tertiary referral university hospitals. Participants underwent anterior active rhinomanometry with and without nasal decongestant before and after surgery. Parents fill in the sinus and nasal quality-of-life survey (SN5). RESULTS: 47 participants were included, and mean age 6.5 ± 2.15. 2 cohorts were defined according to the result of the nasal decongestant test (> 40% improvement in nasal resistance or not). There is a statistically significant difference between groups, with a higher improvement in nasal resistance and airflow after adenoidectomy in the group with less than 40% improvement in nasal resistance. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study supports the use of the decongestant test with rhinomanometry to select children for adenoidectomy; especially as it has proven to be a simple technique, harmless, fast, and easily performed on collaborative children.

[Methodology for the use of kinesiological decongestant dressing in double-jaw orthognathic operations]. / Metodika primeneniya kineziologicheskoi protivootechnoi povyazki pri dvukhchelyustnykh ortognaticheskikh operatsiyakh.

OBJECTIVE: Development and implementation in practice of a technique for applying a postoperative decongestant kinesiological bandage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative analysis of the effectiveness of the developed methodology was carried out. Three groups of patients were formed, consisting of 20 people. The first group of patients received a kinesiological bandage after surgery. The second group used a pressure bandage, while the third group used a chilotherapeutic cooling mask. RESULTS: The average value of the volume of postoperative edema (in cm) on the 5th day after surgery was 10.9 in the first group; 11.4 in the second group; 11.1 in the third group. On the 10th day the corresponding values were 10.7, 11.2 and 11 cm in the third group. CONCLUSIONS: The revealed indicators of average values in the three studied groups proved that the proposed method of applying the decongestant kinesiology dressing has the most pronounced effectiveness in the postoperative period.

Oral antihistamine-decongestant-analgesic combinations for the common cold.

BACKGROUND: Although combination formulas containing antihistamines, decongestants, and/or analgesics are sold over-the-counter in large quantities for the common cold, the evidence for their effectiveness is limited. This is an update of a review first published in 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of antihistamine-decongestant-analgesic combinations compared with placebo or other active controls (excluding antibiotics) in reducing the duration of symptoms and alleviating symptoms (general feeling of illness, nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, sneezing, and cough) in children and adults with the common cold. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE via EBSCOhost, Embase, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, LILACS, and Web of Science to 10 June 2021. We searched the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov on 10 June 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of antihistamine-decongestant-analgesic combinations compared with placebo, other active treatment (excluding antibiotics), or no treatment in children and adults with the common cold. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We categorised the included trials according to the active ingredients. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 30 studies (6304 participants) including 31 treatment comparisons. The control intervention was placebo in 26 trials and an active substance (paracetamol, chlorphenindione + phenylpropanolamine + belladonna, diphenhydramine) in six trials (two trials had placebo as well as active treatment arms). Reporting of methods was generally poor, and there were large differences in study design, participants, interventions, and outcomes. Most of the included trials involved adult participants. Children were included in nine trials. Three trials included very young children (from six months to five years), and five trials included children aged 2 to 16. One trial included adults and children aged 12 years or older. The trials took place in different settings: university clinics, paediatric departments, family medicine departments, and general practice surgeries.  Antihistamine-decongestant: 14 trials (1298 participants). Eight trials reported on global effectiveness, of which six studies were pooled (281 participants on active treatment and 284 participants on placebo). The odds ratio (OR) of treatment failure was 0.31 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.48; moderate certainty evidence); number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 3.9 (95% CI 3.03 to 5.2). On the final evaluation day (follow-up: 3 to 10 days), 55% of participants in the placebo group had a favourable response compared to 70% on active treatment. Of the two trials not pooled, one showed some global effect, whilst the other showed no effect. Adverse effects: the antihistamine-decongestant group experienced more adverse effects than the control group: 128/419 (31%) versus 100/423 (13%) participants suffered one or more adverse effects (OR 1.58, 95%CI 0.78 to 3.21; moderate certainty of evidence). Antihistamine-analgesic: four trials (1608 participants). Two trials reported on global effectiveness; data from one trial were presented (290 participants on active treatment and 292 participants on ascorbic acid). The OR of treatment failure was 0.33 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.46; moderate certainty evidence); NNTB 6.67 (95% CI 4.76 to 12.5). Forty-three per cent of participants in the control group and 70% in the active treatment group were cured after six days of treatment. The second trial also showed an effect in favour of the active treatment. Adverse effects: there were not significantly more adverse effects in the active treatment group compared to placebo (drowsiness, hypersomnia, sleepiness  10/152 versus 4/120; OR 1.64 (95 % CI 0.48 to 5.59; low certainty evidence). Analgesic-decongestant: seven trials (2575 participants). One trial reported on global effectiveness: 73% of participants in the analgesic-decongestant group reported a benefit compared with 52% in the control group (paracetamol) (OR of treatment failure 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.52; moderate certainty evidence; NNTB 4.7). Adverse effects: the decongestant-analgesic group experienced significantly more adverse effects than the control group (199/1122 versus 75/675; OR 1.62  95% CI 1.18 to 2.23; high certainty evidence; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH 17).  Antihistamine-analgesic-decongestant: six trials (1014 participants). Five trials reported on global effectiveness, of which two studies in adults could be pooled: global effect reported with active treatment (52%) and placebo (34%) was equivalent to a difference of less than one point on a four- or five-point scale; the OR of treatment failure was 0.47 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.67; low certainty evidence); NNTB 5.6 (95% CI 3.8 to 10.2). One trial in children aged 2 to 12 years, and two trials in adults found no beneficial effect. Adverse effects: in one trial 5/224 (2%) suffered adverse effects with the active treatment versus 9/208 (4%) with placebo. Two other trials reported no differences between treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found a lack of data on the effectiveness of antihistamine-analgesic-decongestant combinations for the common cold. Based on these scarce data, the effect on individual symptoms is probably too small to be clinically relevant. The current evidence suggests that antihistamine-analgesic-decongestant combinations have some general benefit in adults and older children. These benefits must be weighed against the risk of adverse effects. There is no evidence of effectiveness in young children. In 2005, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a warning about adverse effects associated with the use of over-the-counter nasal preparations containing phenylpropanolamine.

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is a common consequence of COVID-19 infection and persistent symptoms can have a profound impact on quality of life. At present there is little guidance on how best to treat this condition. A variety of interventions have been suggested to promote recovery, including medication and olfactory training. However, it is uncertain whether any intervention is of benefit. This is an update of the 2021 review with one additional study added.  OBJECTIVES: 1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection.  2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance that had persisted for at least four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with 30 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant and palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin.  Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 18 participants who had anosmia for at least 30 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 15-day course of oral corticosteroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal corticosteroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 40 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. Palmitoylethanolamide plus luteolin compared to no intervention We included a single RCT with 12 participants who had anosmia or hyposmia for at least 90 days following COVID-19 infection. Participants received a 30-day course of palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin or no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at 30 days. This is a single, small study and for all outcomes the certainty of evidence was very low. We are unable to draw meaningful conclusions from the numerical results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.

Observational study investigating Ectoin® Rhinitis Nasal Spray as natural treatment option of acute rhinosinusitis compared to treatment with Xylometazoline.

INTRODUCTION: Symptomatic relief of acute rhinosinusitis is commonly achieved with nasal decongestants. The current observational study investigated the efficacy and safety of treatment of acute rhinosinusitis with Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray compared to or in combination with Xylometazoline-containing decongesting nasal spray. METHODS: Patients with acute rhinosinusitis applied either Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray, Xylometazoline nasal spray or a combination of both products. Rhinosinusitis symptoms were assessed, and nasal oedema and endonasal redness were determined by rhinoscopy. Patient diaries based on the validated SNOT (Sino Nasal Outcome Test) questionnaire evaluated rhinosinusitis parameters over time and influences of the disease on quality of life. Following treatment, investigators and patients judged the efficacy and tolerability. RESULTS: Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray diminished common rhinosinusitis symptoms such as nasal obstruction, nasal secretion, facial pain/headache, and smell/taste impairment. Upon treatment over 7 days, rhinosinusitis sum scores decreased statistically significantly (p < 0.001) by - 64.25%, which was comparable to that achieved with Xylometazoline-containing decongesting nasal spray (- 67.60%). No side effects were observed during treatment with Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray, whereas treatment with Xylometazoline-containing nasal spray resulted in nasal mucosa dryness. Concomitant treatment with both products diminished the development of nasal dryness and required fewer applications of Xylometazoline-containing nasal spray. CONCLUSION: Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray is an effective, natural treatment option for acute rhinosinusitis, which may be used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment with a Xylometazoline-containing nasal spray. The concomitant use of Ectoin® Rhinitis Spray might reduce the needed dose of decongestant nasal spray and counteract bothersome side effects such as dry nasal mucosa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The current study was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database under the identifier: NCT03693976 (date of registration: Oct 3, 2018).

Clinical parameters influencing the results of anterior rhinomanometry in children.

BACKGROUND: Nasal obstruction is a frequent symptom in both adults and children and it is a common reason to see an otorhinolaryngologist. Endoscopy of the nasal cavity and the epipharyngeal space along with anterior rhinomanometry is regarded the gold standard since many years to estimate the severity of nasal obstruction in the particular patient. Endoscopy shows anatomical reasons for an obstruction, whereas the nasal flow volume and nasal resistance can be determined using anterior rhinomanometry. Currently, there are only few data available for rhinomanometry results in children. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the application of this technique in the pediatric population for objective evaluation of nasal flow. Whether it achieves reproducible results and which clinical parameters have some influence on the results were studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 427 children (average age of 8.5 years, range 7 months through 17 years) who were admitted to evaluate nasal patency or for allergy testing were examined. After clinical examination and endoscopy of the nasal cavity and epipharyngeal space, anterior rhinomanometry was performed before and after application of decongestant nose drops separately for each nose side in 334 children. The nasal flow with a pressure of 150 Pasc was measured and served for statistical evaluation. Flow values were correlated to clinical and endoscopic parameters along with results of allergy tests (prick tests). RESULTS: Reproducible rhinomanometric measurements were possible in children age 3 years and older. However, the standard deviation and variation of measurements were significant in this cohort of patients. Statistically highest significant correlations were found between flow measurements and body height along with the age of the children (p < 0.01) and status following adenoidectomy (p < 0.05). No statistically significant correlations were found between rhinomanometry and results of prick tests. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that rhinomanometry can be applied in the pediatric population for objective evaluation of nasal obstruction and for determining the effects of decongestant nose drops. The highest correlation was found between nasal flow and children's body height, children's age and status following adenoidectomy. The correlation between nasal flow and clinically/endoscopically determined degree of nasal obstruction was lower. However, definition of normal flow values for particular age groups is challenging since the results showed high variation and standard deviation. Yet with regard to individual patient, the technique achieves reliable results in nasal provocation tests, which are widely used for allergy testing in children. When performed in children it should always be considered that there are age-specific requirements for the examination and interpretation of results in this patient cohort.

Chronic rhinosinusitis in cystic fibrosis: a review of therapeutic options.

PURPOSE: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is observed in almost 100% of patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). CF-related CRS treatment is extremely challenging because of the underlying genetic defect leading to its development. CRS in CF is often refractory to standard therapy, while recurrences after surgical treatment are inevitable in the majority of patients. This study provides a precise review of the current knowledge regarding possible therapeutic options for CF-related CRS. METHODS: The Medline and Web of Science databases were searched without a time limit using the terms "cystic fibrosis" in conjunction with "otorhinolaryngological manifestation", "rhinology" and "sinusitis". RESULTS: Precise guidelines for CF-induced CRS therapy are lacking due to the lack of large cohort randomized controlled trials. None of the existing therapeutic agents has already been recommended for CRS in CF. Therapy targeting the underlying genetic defect, intranasal dornase alfa administration, and topical delivery of colistin and tobramycin showed promising results in CF-related CRS therapy. Besides the potential effectiveness of nasal steroids, strong recommendations for their usage in CF have not been provided yet. Systemic corticosteroid usage is controversial due to its potential negative influence on pulmonary disease. Ibuprofen revealed some positive effects on CF-related CRS in molecular and small cohort studies. Intranasal irrigation with saline solutions could relieve sinonasal symptoms. Nasal decongestants are not recommended. Endoscopic sinus surgery is the first-line surgical option for refractory CRS. Extensive surgical approaches should be considered as they could improve long-term outcomes in CRS. CONCLUSION: Further studies are warranted to establish consensus for CF-related CRS therapy.

Nocturnal nasal congestion is associated with uncontrolled blood pressure in patients with hypertension comorbid obstructive sleep apnea.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the independent role of nasal obstruction on blood pressure (BP) control in patients with hypertension comorbid obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study comprised of 326 newly diagnosed OSA comorbid hypertension patients from March 2018 to December 2021. Sixty-six patients have controlled hypertension, two hundred and nine with uncontrolled hypertension and fifty-one with resistant hypertension. Information on demographic characteristics, sleep data, hypertension status was collected. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Patients with nocturnal nasal congestion had more difficult to control blood pressure, with more numbers of antihypertensive drugs. They tended to have more severe OSA, lower nocturnal oxygen saturation and more severe sleepiness. Univariate analysis showed that nocturnal nasal congestion and Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale scores were associated with uncontrolled BP. After adjusting for age, sex, smoking, alcohol use, OSA severity and CT90, multivariate logistic analysis models showed that nocturnal nasal congestion was independently associated with uncontrolled hypertension (OR = 2.09, p = 0.023). When analyzed more severe resistant hypertension, nocturnal nasal congestion showed a higher association (OR = 2.96, p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: This cross-sectional study demonstrated that the nocturnal nasal congestion was independently associated with uncontrolled BP. The use of nasal decongestants or nasal surgery may be a potential therapeutic target for resistant hypertension in the future.

Comparative nasal airflow with loratadine-pseudoephedrine and fluticasone nasal spray for allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Although it is known that oral antihistamine-pseudoephedrine combination tablets have a faster onset than intranasal corticosteroid sprays in the treatment of allergic rhinitis after the first dose, the magnitude of change has not been measured in a comparative manner. Furthermore, the sensation of sprayed liquid in the nose may lead patients to mistakenly believe that intranasal steroid sprays work instantly. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, numerically, nasal airflow changes provided by a single dose of loratadine-pseudoephedrine tablet (LP) and fluticasone propionate nasal spray (FP) in participants experiencing allergic rhinitis symptoms, including nasal congestion. METHODS: This single-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study evaluated objective nasal airflow changes in patients with a documented sensitivity to ragweed pollen. Participants were randomized to receive 1 of 4 treatment sequences, and their peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) was measured in a span of 4 hours after pollen exposure in an environmental exposure unit. RESULTS: Average change in PNIF was 31% with LP in the course of the study, significantly greater than with placebo and FP (12% and 15%, respectively; P < .001). Nevertheless, FP did not produce a significant change compared with its placebo. At hour one post-dose, LP had a clinically significant 31% increase in PNIF, whereas FP only yielded an 8.6% increase (P < .001). Measurable nasal airflow improvements are associated with the opening of nasal passages, allowing congested patients to breathe more freely. CONCLUSION: A single dose of LP quickly and significantly (P < .001) improved nasal airflow after ragweed pollen challenge in an environmental exposure unit. Comparatively, FP did not display this same benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03443843.

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Olfactory dysfunction is an early and sensitive marker of COVID-19 infection. Although self-limiting in the majority of cases, when hyposmia or anosmia persists it can have a profound effect on quality of life. Little guidance exists on the treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, however several strategies have been proposed from the evidence relating to the treatment of post-viral anosmia (such as medication or olfactory training). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to treat persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Only individuals who had symptoms for at least four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included one study with 18 participants, which compared the use of a 15-day course of oral steroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) with no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at baseline, 20 and 40 days. Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention Recovery of sense of smell was assessed after 40 days (25 days after cessation of treatment) using the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) score. This tool has a range of 0 to 100, and a score of ≥ 90 represents normal olfactory function. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this intervention on recovery of the sense of smell at one to three months (5/9 participants in the intervention group scored ≥ 90 compared to 0/9 in the control group; risk ratio (RR) 11.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 173.66; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell was assessed using the CCCRC score at 40 days. This study reported an improvement in sense of smell in the intervention group from baseline (median improvement in CCCRC score 60, interquartile range (IQR) 40) compared to the control group (median improvement in CCCRC score 30, IQR 25) (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events andother adverse events were not identified in any participants of this study; however, it is unclear how these outcomes were assessed and recorded (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified other ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available. For this (first) version of the living review we identified only one study with a small sample size, which assessed systemic steroids and nasal irrigation (intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant). However, the evidence regarding the benefits and harms from this intervention to treat persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction is very uncertain.

Looking for a cutoff value for the decongestant test in children suffering with turbinate hypertrophy.

OBJECTIVE: The main causes for objectively confirmed chronic impaired nasal breathing in children are adenoid and turbinate hypertrophy. Turbinate hypertrophy may be addressed by turbinate surgery. However, specialized guidelines include no specific indications for pediatric patients. The decongestant test consists of simulating the effect of turbinate surgery by means of a nasal decongestant. This project, developed by the YO-IFOS rhinology group, aims to establish a cutoff value for the nasal decongestant test with rhinomanometry to select children for turbinate surgery. METHODS: Children between 4 and 15 years of age were included. Cases were consecutively selected from children affected by turbinate hypertrophy undergoing turbinate radiofrequency ablation with or without adenoidectomy. Controls were consecutively selected from a sample of healthy children. All the subjects were examined with anterior active rhinomanometry with and without nasal decongestant. RESULTS: Sample included 72 cases and 24 healthy controls. There was a statistically significant difference in the improvement with the decongestant between cases (57.91%) and controls (15.67%). The ROC curve revealed an area under the curve of 0.97. The highest amount of correctly classified individuals (93.44%) corresponded to the cutoff value of 31.66%. However, the value with the highest specificity and highest Youden's index was the 38.88% improvement in nasal resistance with nasal decongestant. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, a preliminary cutoff value for the decongestant test used with rhinomanometry in children has been established. This test could help identify children for turbinate surgery.

Prevention of middle ear barotrauma with oxymetazoline/fluticasone treatment.

Middle ear barotrauma (MEB) is a common complication of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy. It has been reported in more than 40% of HBO2 treatments and can interrupt the sequence of HBO2. MEB may lead to pain, tympanic membrane rupture, and even hearing loss. The aim of this study was to determine if pretreatment with intranasal fluticasone and oxymetazoline affected the incidence of MEB. We conducted a retrospective chart review of subjects undergoing HBO2 at our institution between February 1, 2014, and May 31, 2019. Subjects in the fluticasone/oxymetazoline (FOT) treatment group used intranasal fluticasone 50 mcg two times per day and oxymetazoline 0.05% one spray two times per day beginning 48 hours prior to initial HBO2. Oxymetazoline was discontinued after four days. Fluticasone was continued for the duration of HBO2 therapy. A total of 154 unique subjects underwent 5,683 HBO2 treatments: 39 unique subjects in the FOT group underwent 1,501 HBO2; 115 unique subjects in the nFOT (no oxymetazoline or fluticasone treatment) group underwent 4,182 HBO2 treatments. The incidence of MEB was 15.4% in the FOT group and 16.2% in the nFOT group. This was not a statistically significant difference (OR = 0.77; p = 0.636). Treatment pressure, age over 65 years, male sex, and BMI were not associated with a difference in MEB incidence. In summary, pretreatment with intranasal oxymetazoline and fluticasone in patients undergoing HBO2 did not significantly reduce MEB. More investigation with larger numbers of participants and prospective studies could further clarify this issue.

[The nasal mucosa in the elderly: features, modern approaches to the treatment of inflammatory diseases of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses]. / Slizistaya obolochka polosti nosa v pozhilom vozraste: osobennosti, sovremennye podkhody k terapii vospalitel'nykh zabolevanii polosti nosa i okolonosovykh pazukh.

The article analyzes the problems of population aging that are relevant for the world civilization, the peculiarities of changes in the body in old age and senility, in particular, the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. The analysis of algorithms of actions of an otorhinolaryngologist when prescribing drugs for the treatment of inflammatory diseases of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses in elderly patients is given. The advantages of using a combined nasal spray containing a nasal decongestant of 0.1% xylometazoline and 5% dexpanthenol as a means that improves regeneration and reduces the cytotoxic effect of xylometazoline are reflected. The research of domestic and foreign authors testifying to the rationality of using this combined drug in the practice of an otorhinolaryngologist in the treatment of pathology of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses in elderly people is presented.

Predisposing factors of rhinitis medicamentosa: what can influence drug discontinuation?

BACKGROUND: the primary end point of our study was to define risk factors and identify the underlying conditions that may have led to the abuse of vasoconstrictors in rhinitis medicamentosa. Moreover, we analysed factors that may influence the vasoconstrictors discontinuation. METHODOLOGY: this was a prospective case-control observational study. Cases and controls were evaluated at the baseline in order define factors that may have influenced onset of rhinitis medicamentosa. They were re-evaluated at 3 months to verify symptoms control and drug discontinuation. Finally, they underwent a phone call questionnaire after 12 months regarding drug discontinuation. A potential bias of our study is that evaluating discontinuation we included subjects treated differently according to the main diagnosis. RESULTS: patients with rhinitis medicamentosa were more frequently smokers than controls, they had higher mean HAMA scores and positive psychiatric diseases history. Additionally, we frequently detected a local inflammation at nasal cytology in patients with rhinitis medicamentosa. A significant improvement in all nasal symptoms scores was observed in cases and controls but 29.4% of cases did not discontinue the vasoconstrictors. Two major factors negatively influenced discontinuation: positive nasal cytology and pathological HAMA score. CONCLUSION: we observed that positive local inflammation, anxiety and smoking habit correlate positively with vasoconstrictors abuse. In addition, we demonstrated that anxiety and local inflammation were the most important factors impairing drug discontinuation.

In vitro-in vivo evaluation of tetrahydrozoline-loaded ocular in situ gels on rabbits for allergic conjunctivitis management.

Ocular allergy is one of the most common disorders of the eye surface. The conventional eye drops lack of therapeutic efficacy due to low ocular bioavailability and decreased drug residence time on eye surface. Hence, the present research work aimed to formulate, optimize, and evaluate the in situ gel for ophthalmic drug delivery. The prepared in situ gel formulations were evaluated for clarity, pH, gelling capacity, viscosity, osmolality, in vitro release study, and kinetic evaluation. ex vivo corneal permeation/penetration study using goat and in vivo studies on rabbits were also performed. Fourier-transformed infrared spectroscopy was also applied to study possible interactions between drug and polymers. The formulations found to be stable, nonirritant, and showed sustained release of the drug for a period of up to 24 hr with no ocular damage. The developed in situ gels loaded with tetrahydrozoline are alternative and promising ocular candidates for the treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.

[Optimization of treatment of patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis with relating allergic rhinitis]. / Optimizatsiia lecheniia bol'nykh ostrym bakterial'nym rinosinusitom s soputstvuiushchim allergicheskim rinitom.

The article considers the problem of acute rhinosinusitis and its multifactorial relationship with allergic rhinitis. Data on a higher incidence of acute rhinosinusitis in patients with an allergic background is given, which is primarily associated with a deterioration in the state of the respiratory tract mucous membrane barrier function. It is shown that local allergic inflammation causes a more severe course of acute rhinosinusitis. A review of the combined course of these pathological processes is carried out and options for their treatment are considered. A study of the clinical use of the complex preparation Frinosol is described, which, thanks to the combination of a nasal decongestant and an antihistamine in its composition, effectively alleviates the symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis in patients with allergic rhinitis. It has been shown that the use of Frinosol in the complex treatment of adult patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis, combined with allergic rhinitis is safe and effective.

[Rhinitis medicamentosa]. / Lekarstvenno-indutsirovannyi rinit.

One type of non-allergic non-infectious rhinitis is represented by a heterogeneous group of rhinitis medicamentosa, which can be divided into several pathogenetic types. The most common rebound nasal congestion associated with the use of topical decongestants. Excessive use of intranasal decongestants leads to a decrease in the number of alpha-adrenoreceptors on the surface of cell membranes and uncoupling their connection with the G-protein and the development of tachyphylaxis. To prevent the development of rebound nasal congestion caused by topical decongestants, it is important to limit the frequency of their use. In most cases, the duration of the use of vasoconstrictor drugs should be limited to 5-7 days, according to Patient information leaflets for the drugs. However, in patients who have had a history of episodes of rebound nasal congestion, which develops including the previously indicated periods, the duration of decongestant therapy should be limited to 3 days. Rhinitis associated with local inflammation is caused by the intake of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Currently, the so-called "aspirin triad" is well known - a combination of bronchial asthma, rhinosinusitis (often polyposis) and intolerance to ASA. Neurogenic rhinitis develops due to the use of drugs that violate vascular tone, for example, antihypertensive drugs or type 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitors. Drug-induced rhinitis has a significant impact on the patient's quality of life: nasal congestion, rhinorrhea, secondary night apnea, insomnia as a result of nasal breathing disturbances, headaches, irritability, weakness after sleepless nights disturb patients to a large extent. Timely diagnosis and withdrawal of a provocative drug, the use of topical corticosteroids in case of severe rhinitis are the basis of the treatment of rhinitis medicamentosa. In severe cases, there is a need, including surgical treatment, such as, for example, submucosal laser destruction of the lower nasal concha.