A systematic review of randomised controlled trials on topical nasal steroids.

Introduction: Intranasal corticosteroids (INCs) are the first line of therapy for chronic sinonasal conditions such as rhinitis and rhinosinusitis. Among these, one of the most frequently used is beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP). Over the years many studies have evaluated the efficacy of BDP as part of therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and allergic rhinitis (AR) along with nasal washes, which seems to be very well tolerated. Objective: To analyse the data in the literature regarding the various therapeutic regimens of BDP in different sinonasal disease and their efficacy and tolerability. Materials and methods: Using different search engines, the posology, efficacy, and tolerability of BDP were reviewed and a total of 64 full-length articles were examined for eligibility. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 articles were reviewed. Results: BDP is among the group of INCs with significant improvement of nasal symptoms and has good efficacy and safety. Conclusions: BDP nasal spray is one of the most frequently prescribed INC for rhinitis and rhinosinusitis. Treatment with BDP resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in nasal symptoms associated with AR and CRS. BDP is well tolerated, and the safety profile is similar to that of placebo in most patients. These results, in conjunction with the significant benefit reported in subjects with CRS and AR, provide convincing evidence of the overall effectiveness of BDP for the treatment of the full spectrum of sinonasal disease.

Posterior Nasal Nerve Ablation as a Viable Treatment Option for the Primary Symptom of Postnasal Drip.

BACKGROUND: Postnasal drip (PND) syndrome is a prevalent complaint encountered in otolaryngology practices. PND may be refractory to medical therapy, and surgical treatments are complicated by side effects. OBJECTIVE: While posterior nasal nerve (PNN) ablation has demonstrated efficacy for chronic rhinitis overall, we sought to examine the effect of PNN ablation for patients with PND as their primary complaint. METHODS: This is a retrospective case series study of 40 chronic rhinitis (CR) patients with a primary complaint of PND. Included patients had to have failed medical therapy such as anti-cholinergic nasal sprays, reflux treatments, and/or nasal steroids. Primary outcome measures included 22 item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) PND component and Total Nasal Symptom Score. Secondary outcome measure was subjective improvement, defined as a > 30% improvement in PND symptoms. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 138 days (interquartile range: 72-193). 72.5% (29/40) of patients reported at least a 30% improvement in PND symptoms. Mean PND SNOT-22 scores were 4.2/5 (SD = 0.8) pre-procedure versus 1.9/5 (SD = 1.3) post-procedure (P = .001). PNN ablation response did not correlate to ipratropium bromide nasal spray response, although younger and non-smoker patients had better response rates. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study of PNN ablation for the primary symptom of PND demonstrates efficacy as assessed by the PND component of SNOT-22 and subjective improvement. These results can be useful in guiding physician-patient discussions in determining treatment options for medically refractory PND.

Medical treatment does not reduce surgery rates in children with adenoid hypertrophy.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to study adenoidectomy rates in children with adenoid hypertrophy (AH) who were either treated with medical therapy or not during a 2-year follow-up period in a longitudinal population-based study. METHODS: We retrospectively identified healthy children aged 1-18 years between 2014 and 2020 with AH diagnosis from the Clalit Health Services database, the largest healthcare maintenance organization in Israel. The main outcome was adenoidectomy alone or in combination with other procedures performed within 2 years after diagnosis. The treatment group consisted of children who received medical therapy, defined as a pharmacy purchase of montelukast, nasal steroid sprays and/or antihistamines (medical therapy aimed to reduce AH) for ≥2 consecutive months, while the control group consisted of untreated children. RESULTS: We identified 68,356 unique children with AH, of them 56 % were boys, with a mean age of 4.9 ± 3.3 years. Of them, 5310 (7.7 %) received medical therapy. Overall, 6633 (9.7 %) underwent adenoidectomy within 2 years following diagnosis. There was no significant difference in surgery referral rates between the treatment and the control groups, 10 % vs. 9.7 %, respectively (p = 0.3). When adjusted for age and sex, the likelihood of undergoing adenoidectomy was similar in both groups (HR = 0.98, 95 % CI = 0.90-1.07, p = 0.6). Among operated children, the average time from diagnosis to surgery was statistically significantly longer in the treatment group than in the control group, 346 ± 180 vs 311 ± 175 days (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prescribing montelukast, nasal steroids and/or oral antihistamines was not associated with a reduction in adenoidectomy rates and was associated with an average surgery delay of 35 days.

Intranasal Schirmer Test in Allergic Rhinitis: Relationship to Symptom Scores and Role in Determining Response to Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: The Intranasal Schirmer test (INS) is an easy to administer test that can yield objective measurement of the quantity of nasal secretion and has been studied in patients with various nasal and systemic pathologies; however, the role of INS in patients with allergic rhinitis remains unclear. Our aim was to determine the relationship between various allergic symptoms and the Intranasal Schirmer Test (INS) score and to evaluate the utility of INS in determining treatment effect in patients with allergic rhinitis. METHODS: This prospective study included patients with allergic rhinitis who were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups (nasal steroid only, oral antihistamine only, nasal steroid and oral antihistamine). For all patients, Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) was used to measure symptom severity and INS was administered before and after treatment. Pre-treatment and post treatment TNSS and INS scores were compared between different treatment groups and within each group. RESULTS: The study included 120 patients, with 40 patients in each group. There were significant differences both in pre-treatment and post-treatment symptom severity score with changes of INS scores between treatment groups (P < .001 and P = .002, respectively). There was a significant difference between pre-treatment and post-treatment symptom severity scores and the INS score in each treatment group (P < .001). There was also a significant positive correlation between INS score and TNSS (r = .591 and P < .001). CONCLUSION: The Intranasal Schirmer Test can be used as an objective tool for patients with allergic rhinitis as an adjunct to subjective patient symptom reports and can also be used to determine the response to treatment.

Nasal eosinophilia as a preliminary discriminative biomarker of non-allergic rhinitis in every day clinical pediatric practice.

BACKGROUND: Non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) in children, named local allergic rhinitis (LAR) and non-allergic rhinitis with eosinophilia syndrome (NARES), are recently termed entities in childhood characterized by symptoms suggestive of allergic rhinitis in the absence of systemic atopy. Nasal eosinophils (nEo) are the principal cells involved in the allergy inflammation and nasal allergen provocation test is the gold standard method for the diagnosis, albeit with several limitations. The aim of this study was to validate the presence of nEo in combination with the therapeutic response to nasal steroids, as a preliminary discriminator of NAR in real life data. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, 128 children (63.3% male, aged 72 ± 42 m) with history of NAR were enrolled and followed up for 52 ± 32 m. Nasal cytology was performed and nasal steroids trial was recommended initially in all and repeatedly in relapsing cases. Response to therapy was clinically evaluated using 10-VAS. RESULTS: Significant nEo was found in 59.3% of the cases and was related to reported dyspnea episodes. 23.4% had no response to therapy, whereas 51.5% were constantly good responders. Response to therapy was related to nEo and a cutoff point of 20% was defined as the most reliable biological marker with 94% sensitivity and 77% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: In children with symptoms of NAR, the presence of nEo > 20% constantly responding to nasal steroid therapy, is a clear indicator of atopy. In an everyday clinical setting, it emerged as an easy, preliminary, cell biomarker suggestive of further investigation such as NAPT, to discriminate LAR from NARES.

Effectiveness of intranasal steroids on rhinitis symptoms, sleep quality, and quality of life in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the impact of perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) on the health-related quality of life (HRQL) and measure performance issues that are of major concerns for PAR patients, as well as determining the effect of intra-nasal steroids (INS) on PAR and associated congestion, sleep complaints, and daytime sleepiness. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study. A total of 78 PAR patients underwent otorhinolaryngological examination and skin test. All participants filled in the Nocturnal Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (NRQLQ), the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS), and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Participants were asked to undergo treatment with Budesonide (BUD) topical aqueous nasal spray for eight weeks. After the treatment period, all participants were again asked to answer the three questionnaires. RESULTS: The results of this study found statistically significant improvements in the overall NRQLQ score (p < 0.001) and individual NRQLQ domain scores (p < 0.05) after INS treatment. A statistically significant reduction in symptom severity in the four NRQLQ domains before and after treatment was found (p < 0.05), except for restlessness, post-nasal drip, and avoiding symptom triggers (p = 0.575, 0.172, and 0.705, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in ESS and SSS scores before and after treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PAR has a significant impact on sleep quality and, as a result, a lower QOL. This study demonstrates that INS is an effective modality in the treatment of PAR and positively impacts patients' QOL by improving nasal symptoms, daytime fatigue, and somnolence, and sleep quality.

Analysis of Factors Causing False-Negative Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Results in Oropharyngeal and Nasopharyngeal Swabs of Patients With COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze factors regarding patient characteristics, sampling techniques, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) specific manifestations that may cause false-negative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. For the diagnosis of COVID-19, patients with RT-PCR test positive in the first nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were accepted as true positive, and patients with negative 3 consecutive swab results were considered true negative. Those who had a negative initial swab were considered false negatives if they subsequently tested positive on the second or third swab. Demographic data of the patients, the onset of the disease, presence of nasal septal deviation, presence of epistaxis, the clinician (otolaryngologist/other physicians [OP]) who collected the samples, and medical treatments for laryngopharyngeal reflux, allergic respiratory diseases, allergic rhinitis, which include proton pump inhibitors and nasal steroids (NS), were documented. The analysis of dependent variables was performed with the chi-square test. Binary logistic regression was performed for significant variables. RESULTS: A total of 399 patients were included in the study, and 357 (89.5%) patients were detected as positive after 2 or 3 consecutive RT-PCR tests. The presence of ageusia, anosmia, and collecting the samples within 7 days following the onset of symptoms were determined as significant factors for positive RT-PCR results (P = <.001; odds ratio [OR] = 6.2, 5.8, 11.6, respectively). The profession of the clinician (OP), NS use, and the presence of epistaxis were detected as significant factors for the false-negative RT-PCR results (P < .001; OR = 2.3, 3.1, 8.7, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patient- and/or sample-related factors can affect RT-PCR results of possible COVID-19 cases. The presence of these factors can easily be determined in cases with high clinical suspicion and negative RT-PCR results. The presence of ageusia, anosmia, early sampling (<7days), and appropriate collection of swabs decrease false-negative RT-PCR results.

Evaluation of effects of chronic nasal steroid use on rhinological symptoms of COVID-19 with SNOT-22 questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of corticosteroids for the treatment of COVID-19 infection are documented in the literature. The goal of the study is to compare the severity of rhinological symptoms of COVID-19 between patients with nasal steroid use (NSU) and the control group (CG) using the sino-nasal outcome test (SNOT-22) questionnaire. METHODS: A face-to-face survey was conducted at a second referral state hospital between. Patients with a complete recovery from COVID-19 were included in NSU and CG groups. Two subscales of the SNOT-22 were filled by the patients. The frequency and duration of smell and taste loss and SNOT-22 scores were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were included in the study. Thirty-one patients were in CG and 16 patients in the NSU group. Twenty-four (51.1%) patients were females and 23 (48.9%) were males. The mean age was 41.4 ± 8.6 years. Olfactory dysfunction was detected in 12 (75%) patients in the NSU group, and 31 (93.3%) patients in the control group (CG). Gustatory dysfunction was seen in 10 (62.5%) patients in the NSU group and 24 (77.4%) patients NSU group. (p = 0.071, 0.279, respectively). The duration of the olfactory (6.6 ± 2.5 days) and gustatory dysfunction (6.1 ± 2.6 days) and the mean SNOT-22 total score (11.9 ± 1.6) was significantly lower in the NSU group (p < 0.001, CI 11.1-5.1, CI 9.9-4.6, CI 9.3-5.9, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although nasal steroid use does not prevent olfactory and gustatory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients, it may reduce the severity and duration of these symptoms.

Effects of intranasal steroids on continuous positive airway pressure compliance among patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

BACKGROUND: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea can produce troublesome nasal symptoms, especially congestion, which may affect the continuity of using CPAP. Intranasal steroids are often prescribed to reduce these side effects, although few recent studies exist supporting the benefits of this treatment for CPAP-induced nasal side effects. METHODS: Eighty-three patients with OSA were enrolled in a prospective, randomized controlled study. All patients received CPAP treatment and were divided in two groups. The study group was prescribed fluticasone furoate nasal spray 55 µg, and the compliance to CPAP for patients in both groups was recorded by device memory card. Total nasal symptom score was assessed using a questionnaire by direct interview, with follow-up performed at 30 and 90 days after treatment. RESULT: Compliance to CPAP increased in both groups with significantly greater compliance in the intranasal steroid group compared to the control group without intranasal steroid (P value = 0.002, 0.001, and 0.020, respectively) after 90 days of treatment. No difference in nasal symptoms was found between the groups after 30 days of treatment. However, adding an intranasal steroid resulted in decreased rhinorrhea and congestion symptoms (P value < 0.001 and < 0.001) after 90 days of treatment. CONCLUSION: The addition of an intranasal steroid decreased the frequency of nasal symptoms, especially rhinorrhea and congestion, among patients with OSA initiating CPAP therapy and increased compliance to CPAP after 90 days of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRB approval ID: R179h Clinical trial ID: TCTR20200715001.

Impact of Post-Surgical Therapies on Endoscopic and External Dacryocystorhinostomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Epiphora is a common ophthalmologic sign that is most commonly caused by distal acquired lacrimal obstruction. Recent data have demonstrated that external dacryocystorhinostomy (EXT-DCR) and endoscopic endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy (END-DCR) can be considered the treatments of choice. However, different post-surgical medical therapies are available and are currently used to improve surgical outcomes, although no direct comparison has been performed. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the influence of post-surgical medical treatments on END-DCR and EXT-DCR outcomes. METHODS: A structured search was conducted using the U.S. National Library of Medicine (PubMed), EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases with a final search performed in May 2020. The research identified papers published later than 2000 with at least 50 single clinician procedures performed in EXT-DCR and END-DCR. Articles that studied acute infections, revision cases, mixed cohort studies of acquired and congenital obstruction, and tumour were excluded. The influence of systemic antibiotic/steroids, local application of mitomycin C, nasal/ocular antibiotic, nasal/ocular steroids and nasal decongestants was analysed. RESULTS: In total, 11,445 papers were selected, 2,741 of which were reviewed after screening, and 18 included after full text review (0.6% of the initial articles reviewed) which involved 3,590 procedures. Considering the low number of publications on EXT-DCR, statistical analysis of post-surgical therapy was not feasible. In END-DCR, the analyses were performed only for nasal steroids (p = 0.58), oral antibiotics (p = 0.45) and nasal decongestant (p = 0.27), which demonstrated no meaningful influence. Given the variable association between adjunctive medical therapies, pharmacologic molecular heterogeneity and modality/concentration of application, these results should be considered critically. Additionally, no differences were seen for application of silicone stenting, whereas, no statistical analysis was performed for mitomycin C. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high success rate of EXT-DCR and END-DCR and the heterogeneity of literature data, the effective influence of post-surgical medical therapy is difficult to identify. Future large prospective randomized studies could help in detecting the optimal adjunctive therapy for these surgeries.

Towards definitive management of allergic rhinitis: best use of new and established therapies.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is an inflammatory disease of the nasal mucosa impacting up to 25% of Canadians. The standard of care for AR includes a treatment plan that takes into account patient preferences, the severity of the disease, and most essentially involves a shared decision-making process between patient and provider. BODY: Since their introduction in the 1940s, antihistamines (AHs) have been the most utilized class of medications for the treatment of AR. First-generation AHs are associated with adverse central nervous system (CNS) and anticholinergic side effects. On the market in the 1980s, newer generation AHs have improved safety and efficacy. Compared to antihistamines, intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) have significantly greater efficacy but longer onset of action. Intranasal AH and INCS combinations offer a single medication option that offers broader disease coverage and faster symptom control. However, cost and twice-per-day dosing remain a major limitation. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the only disease-modifying option and can be provided through subcutaneous (SCIT) or sublingual (SLIT) routes. While SCIT has been the definitive management option for many years, SLIT tablets (SLIT-T) have also been proven to be safe and efficacious. CONCLUSION: There is a range of available treatment options for AR that reflect the varying disease length and severity. For mild to moderate AR, newer generation AHs should be the first-line treatment, while INCS are mainstay treatments for moderate to severe AR. In patients who do not respond to INCS, a combination of intranasal AH/INCS (AZE/FP) should be considered, assuming that cost is not a limiting factor. While SCIT remains the option with the most available allergens that can be targeted, it has the potential for severe systemic adverse effects and requires weekly visits for administration during the first 4 to 6 months. SLIT-T is a newer approach that provides the ease of being self-administered and presents a reduced risk for systemic reactions. In any case, standard care for AR includes a treatment plan that takes into account disease severity and patient preferences.

The Association of Industry Payments to Physicians with Prescription of Brand-Name Intranasal Corticosteroids.

Objectives To examine the association of industry payments for brand-name intranasal corticosteroids with prescribing patterns. Study Design Cross-sectional retrospective analysis. Setting Nationwide. Subjects and Methods We identified physicians prescribing intranasal corticosteroids to Medicare beneficiaries 2014-2015 and physicians receiving payment for the brand-name intranasal corticosteroids Dymista and Nasonex. Prescription and payment data were linked by physician, and we compared the proportion of prescriptions written for brand-name intranasal corticosteroids in industry-compensated vs non-industry-compensated physicians. We associated the number and dollar amount of industry payments with the relative frequency of brand-name prescriptions. Results In total, 164,587 physicians prescribing intranasal corticosteroids were identified, including 7937 (5%) otolaryngologists; 10,800 and 3886 physicians received industry compensation for Dymista and Nasonex, respectively. Physicians receiving industry payment for Dymista prescribed more Dymista as a proportion of total intranasal corticosteroid prescriptions than noncompensated physicians (3.1% [SD = 9.6%] vs 0.2% [SD = 2.5%], respectively, P < .001). Similar trends were seen for Nasonex (12.0% [SD = 16.8%] vs 4.8% [SD = 13.6%], P < .001). The number and dollar amount of payment were significantly correlated to the relative frequency of Dymista (ρ = 0.26, P < .001 and ρ = 0.20, P < .001, respectively) and Nasonex prescriptions (ρ = 0.09, P < .001 and ρ = 0.15, P < .001, respectively). For Dymista, this association was stronger in otolaryngologists than general practitioners ( P < .001). There was a stronger correlation between the percentage of prescriptions and the number and dollar amount of payments for Dymista than for Nasonex ( P = .014 and P < .001). Conclusions Industry compensation for brand-name intranasal corticosteroids is significantly associated with prescribing patterns. The magnitude of association may depend on physician specialty and the drug's time on the market.

Medications for Allergic Rhinitis.

Objectives Adherence to the allergic rhinitis clinical practice guideline is being considered as a potential focus for national performance metrics. To help inform this discussion, we assessed patient- and clinician-reported medication administration among nationally representative populations of patients with allergic rhinitis. Study Design Cross-sectional analyses. Setting and Subjects Home health assessments, ambulatory visits. Methods Participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey / National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey were assessed. The primary outcomes were the percentage of patients reporting receipt of antihistamines and/or nasal steroids among those with allergy-related symptoms and the percentage for whom a clinician administered these medications when diagnosing allergic rhinitis. Secondary outcomes included assessments of those with worse quality of life, confirmatory allergy testing, and leukotriene receptor antagonist use. Results Within the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, an estimated 29.2 million patients were diagnosed with "hay fever," while 92.2 million were diagnosed with "allergies." Patients with symptoms of allergic rhinitis reported that antihistamines or nasal steroids were prescribed in 21.1% to 24.0% of cases. Leukotriene receptor antagonists were given to 1.7% of those without asthma or use of other allergy medications. Within the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey / National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, observations representing 149.5 million visits for allergic rhinitis demonstrated that nasal steroids were administered in 29.6% of cases, while nonsedating and sedating antihistamines were given in 22.4% and 17.2%, respectively. Conclusions Despite a high prevalence of allergic rhinitis, per patient report and clinician entry, a substantial number of affected patients do not receive antihistamines and nasal steroids.

Comparison of Oral Montelukast and Intranasal Fluticasone in Patients with Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis.

INTRODUCTION: Even though the links between upper and lower airway had been of interest to clinicians since long back, it has not attracted the attention of the researchers till recent past. But the evidence is still far from conclusive, due to limited number of randomized controlled trials available on subjects with concomitant allergic rhinitis and asthma. This gap in the knowledge is even more conspicuous in Indian population. AIM: The current study is conducted with an objective of comparing the efficacy and tolerability of intranasal Fluticasone and oral Montelukast in treatment of allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was a prospective randomized, single blinded, comparative, parallel group study, with two intervention groups conducted in a tertiary teaching hospital in Chennai, Southern India. One hundred and twenty patients diagnosed with concomitant diagnosis of allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma was randomly allocated to either Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray or oral Montelukast group. RESULTS: Out of total 120 subjects recruited, 108 subjects were included in the final analysis. The mean reduction in asthma and rhinitis symptom scores and improvement in PEFR was higher for Group A, compared to Group B during all the follow-up periods. No statistically significant difference was observed in proportion of subjects reporting exacerbations in the current study. Both the treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Addition of intranasal Fluticasone propionate to Salmeterol plus Fluticasone is beneficial in improving asthma control, allergic rhinitis control and lung functions as compared to oral Montelukast. Thereby the use of intranasal Fluticasone Propionate in comparison to oral Montelukast in control of Allergic Rhinitis is justified as per the significant improvement in outcome measures.

The effect of long-term use of intranasal steroids on intraocular pressure.

Long-term use of topical nasal steroids (especially older generation steroids) has been shown to elevate intraocular pressure (IOP), but newer intranasal steroids are thought to have a minimal effect on IOP because of their low bioavailability. This study aimed to investigate alterations in IOP with two commonly used intranasal steroids for a 6-month period of time. One-hundred allergic rhinitis patients, divided equally into two groups, used mometasone furoate and fluticasone furoate intranasal steroids for 6 months. IOPs were measured before treatment and repeated at the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 24th weeks of treatment. The IOPs of the groups were then compared. No statistically significant alteration was observed between the groups during the treatment time period. It was found that new generation intranasal steroids can be used safely, and there may not be an increased risk of IOP elevation in prolonged use in normal healthy people.

The Efficacy of Nasal Steroids in Treatment of Otitis Media with Effusion: A Comparative Study

Introduction Otitis media with effusion (OME) continues to be an important pediatric clinical problem, and more studies are needed to decide the proper treatment for it. Objective To assess the efficacy of nasal steroids in the management of OME by comparing its results with that of oral steroid and that of nasal saline spray as placebo. Methods This study was carried on 60 patients with OME who were divided into three groups: in group 1, 20 patients received mometasone furoate spray, one puff in each nostril daily, for 3 months; in group 2, 20 patients received oral prednisolone, 5 mg three times per day for the first 3 weeks; in group 3, 20 patients received nasal saline spray, one puff in each nostril daily for 3 months. Results A highly significant difference between systemic or topical (nasal spray) steroid therapy and saline nasal spray was detected (p < 0.001), and the difference between systemic and topical steroid was nonsignificant (p > 0.05). Conclusion Nasal steroid spray can be used as an effective treatment for OME, giving a significant result similar to systemic steroid. Further studies are needed to investigate its use for longer duration and in recurrent cases.(AU)

The Efficacy of Nasal Steroids in Treatment of Otitis Media with Effusion: A Comparative Study.

Introduction Otitis media with effusion (OME) continues to be an important pediatric clinical problem, and more studies are needed to decide the proper treatment for it. Objective To assess the efficacy of nasal steroids in the management of OME by comparing its results with that of oral steroid and that of nasal saline spray as placebo. Methods This study was carried on 60 patients with OME who were divided into three groups: in group 1, 20 patients received mometasone furoate spray, one puff in each nostril daily, for 3 months; in group 2, 20 patients received oral prednisolone, 5 mg three times per day for the first 3 weeks; in group 3, 20 patients received nasal saline spray, one puff in each nostril daily for 3 months. Results A highly significant difference between systemic or topical (nasal spray) steroid therapy and saline nasal spray was detected (p < 0.001), and the difference between systemic and topical steroid was nonsignificant (p > 0.05). Conclusion Nasal steroid spray can be used as an effective treatment for OME, giving a significant result similar to systemic steroid. Further studies are needed to investigate its use for longer duration and in recurrent cases.

Budesonide nasal irrigations in the postoperative management of chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: Nasal steroids play an important role in the postoperative management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, commercially available nasal steroid sprays may not deliver adequate amounts of medication to the entire postoperative sinus cavity. The off-label use of budesonide nasal irrigation (BNI) theoretically solves this problem by delivering concentrated steroid solution through a high-pressure, high-volume system. Several studies have attested to the safety of BNI, but there are very few reports of its efficacy. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of prospectively-collected data. We identified 60 patients who were prescribed BNI postoperatively, but had a lapse in therapy for 1 month or longer. The 20-item Sinonasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-20) and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores while the patients were using BNI were compared with scores from the same patients while they were not using BNI. Student paired t test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Thirty patients had eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (eCRS) with polyps (eCRSwNP), 13 had allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), 13 had Samter's triad (ST), and 4 had eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps (eCRSsNP). Mean follow-up time was 25 months (range, 2-89 months). Overall, SNOT-20 scores were significantly lower with BNI (p < 0.05). On subgroup analysis, SNOT-20 scores were significantly improved with BNI for patients with eCRS and Samter's triad (p = 0.04, 0.03). Endoscopy scores were significantly improved only in the eCRS group (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The addition of BNI is beneficial in the postoperative management of patients with CRS.