Effects of chamomile extract nasal drop on chronic rhinosinusitis treatment: A randomized double blind study.

OBJECTIVES: Recently, more attention has been paid to herbal treatment in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients. Chamomile (Matrricaria chamomilla) has extensive clinical uses in traditional-Persian medicine for its therapeutic properties. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of chamomile extract on the clinical symptoms of patients with CRS in a university hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a randomized double-blind placebo-group clinical trial, 74 CRS patients were examined by an otolaryngologist blinded to the study groups, and the effects of treatment (according to SNOT-22 questionnaire) and possible complications recorded. Statistical analysis performed using SPSS software version 21, and level of significance considered as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients (31 females and 43 male), 37 cases randomized in the intervention and 37 cases in the placebo group. The Lund-Mackay score, clinical findings in endoscopic nasal examination and mean score of the SNOT-22 were not significantly different at baseline visit between the two study groups. The adjusted mean score of quality of life during the four time periods in the intervention group (34.3, confidence interval of 95%: 31.8-36.7) was significantly lower than that of control group (45.9, confidence interval of 95%: 43.5-48.4) (P-value = 0.001). Also, clinical improvement in endoscopic nasal examination was significant in intervention group compared with placebo group. CONCLUSION: Chamomile extract is effective in further reducing the clinical symptoms and improving the quality of life of CRS patients.

Treatment of loin pain suspected to be renal colic with papaverine hydrochloride: a prospective double-blind randomised study.

OBJECTIVE: • To assess the efficacy of papaverine hydrochloride combined with a diclofenac sodium suppository to relieve renal colic compared with diclofenac suppository monotherapy, as the effect of phosphodiesterase inhibitors on ureteric muscles might reduce the pain of renal colic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • A prospective, double-blind clinical study was performed. • In all, 550 patients aged 17-55 years with acute renal colic were randomised to two groups. Patients in one group (group A) received a diclofenac suppository (100 mg) plus saline 0.9% (placebo) and the other group (group B) received a diclofenac suppository (100 mg) plus intravenous (i.v.) papaverine hydrochloride (1.5 mg/kg up to 120 mg). • Pain intensity was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 0, 20 and 40 min after treatment. Further analgesia was provided at the patients' request (25 mg pethidine intramuscularly). RESULTS: • Baseline characteristics (sex, age, past history of similar pains) were similar in the two groups. • There were significant differences in VAS pain scores between 0 and 20 min and 0 and 40 min in both groups (P < 0.001). • At the end of study, 71.1% of patients in group A and 90.9% of patients in group B reported pain relief and did not require pethidine, respectively. • Significantly more patients in group A required further analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: • According to our results, i.v. papaverine hydrochloride plus a diclofenac suppository were more effective than the diclofenac suppository alone for treating acute renal colic. • Therefore, i.v. papaverine hydrochloride is a beneficial supplemental therapy to relieve renal colic pain, particularly combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.