-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2018Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care encounters. It causes significant symptoms including facial pain, congested nose, headache, thick nasal mucus, fever,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care encounters. It causes significant symptoms including facial pain, congested nose, headache, thick nasal mucus, fever, and cough and often results in time off work or school. Sinusitis treatment focuses on eliminating causative factors and controlling the inflammatory and infectious components. The frozen, dried, natural fluid extract of the Cyclamen europaeum plant delivered intranasally is thought to have beneficial effects in relieving congestion by facilitating nasal drainage, and has an anti-inflammatory effect.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of topical intranasal Cyclamen europaeum extract on clinical response in adults and children with acute sinusitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO ICTRP) in January 2018. We also searched the reference lists of included studies and review literature for further relevant studies and contacted trial authors for additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing Cyclamen europaeum extract administered intranasally to placebo, antibiotics, intranasal corticosteroids, or no treatment in adults or children, or both, with acute sinusitis. Acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by nasal endoscopy or by radiological evidence.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two randomised controlled trials that involved a total of 147 adult outpatients with acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy who were assigned to Cyclamen europaeum nasal spray or placebo study arms for up to 15 days. The risk of selection and detection bias was unclear, as allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessors were not reported in either study. Attrition was high (60%) in one study, although dropouts were balanced between study arms.Neither study reported our two primary outcomes: proportion of participants whose symptoms resolved or improved at 14 days and 30 days. No serious adverse events or complications related to treatment were reported; however, more mild adverse events such as nasal and throat irritation, mild epistaxis, and sneezing occurred in Cyclamen europaeum group participants (50%) compared to placebo group participants (24%) (risk ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 3.29); moderate-quality evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of Cyclamen europaeum for people with acute sinusitis is unknown. Although no serious side effects were observed, 50% of participants who received Cyclamen europaeum reported adverse events compared with 24% of those who received placebo.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Cyclamen; Humans; Nasal Polyps; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Sinusitis
PubMed: 29750825
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011341.pub2 -
Frontiers in Allergy 2023Unlike acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) which is mostly viral in etiology, the role of viruses in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) remains unclear. Viruses may play a role in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Unlike acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) which is mostly viral in etiology, the role of viruses in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) remains unclear. Viruses may play a role in initiation, exacerbations or perpetuate chronic inflammatory responses in the sinonasal mucosa. Research needs to characterize whether viruses are part of the normal sinonasal microbiome, colonizers or pathogenic.
METHODS
Systematic review of the English literature was conducted. Following databases were searched with an initial search conducted in November 2021 and then updated through June 2023: Ovid Medline (1946 to present), Ovid Embase (1988 to present), Scopus (2004 to present) and Web of Science (1975 to present). MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms included: viruses, virus diseases, sinusitis, and rhinovirus. Keywords: virus, viral infection*, sinusitis, rhinovirus, chronic rhinosinusitis, CRS, respiratory virus, respiratory infection*, and exacerbat*. A supplementary search was conducted through September 2023: Ovid Medline (1946 to present), Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily. Keywords used were: virus, viral infection*, sinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, CRS, respiratory virus, respiratory infection*, and exacerbat*.
RESULTS
Thirty studies on viruses in CRS met inclusion criteria for full review. These included 17 studies on prevalence of virus in CRS, 5 examining probable causes of host susceptibility to viral infections in CRS, and 8 studies examining pathological pathways in viral association of CRS. The prevalence of viruses in nasal specimens of CRS subjects was higher as compared to controls in most studies, though a few studies showed otherwise. Rhinovirus was the most common virus detected. Studies showed that viruses may be associated with persistent hyper-responsiveness in the sinonasal mucosa, susceptibility to bacterial infections, upregulation of genes involved in the immune response and airway remodeling as well as CRS exacerbations. Presence of viruses was also associated with worse symptom severity scores in CRS subjects.
CONCLUSION
Most data show higher presence of viruses in nasal and serum samples of CRS subjects as compared to controls but their exact role in CRS pathophysiology in unclear. Large studies with longitudinal sampling at all disease phases (i.e., prior to disease initiation, during disease initiation, during disease persistence, and during exacerbations) using standardized sampling techniques are needed to definitively elucidate the role of virus in CRS.
PubMed: 38116043
DOI: 10.3389/falgy.2023.1237068 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2013Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school.
OBJECTIVES
We examined whether intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are effective in relieving symptoms of acute sinusitis in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 4, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1990 to May 2013) and bibliographies of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing INCS treatment to placebo or no intervention in adults and children with acute sinusitis. Acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by radiological evidence or by nasal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with either resolution or improvement of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were any adverse events that required discontinuation of treatment, drop-outs before the end of the study, rates of relapse, complications and return to school or work.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus.
MAIN RESULTS
No new trials were found for inclusion in this update. Four studies involving 1943 participants with acute sinusitis met our inclusion criteria. The trials were well-designed and double-blind and studied INCS versus placebo or no intervention for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow-up were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When we combined the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis, participants receiving INCS were more likely to experience resolution or improvement in symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement of symptoms or complete relief: for mometasone furoate 400 µg versus 200 µg (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18 versus RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.11). No significant adverse events were reported and there was no significant difference in the drop-out and recurrence rates for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is limited for acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy but supports the use of INCS as a monotherapy or as an adjuvant therapy to antibiotics. Clinicians should weigh the modest but clinically important benefits against possible minor adverse events when prescribing therapy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Intranasal; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Child; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sinusitis
PubMed: 24293353
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005149.pub4 -
Anales de Pediatria (Barcelona, Spain :... Mar 2011The aim of this systematic review is to assess whether antibacterial agents are more effective than either placebo or no intervention at all in the treatment of acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this systematic review is to assess whether antibacterial agents are more effective than either placebo or no intervention at all in the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We reviewed the databases and search engines: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in children comparing antibiotics versus placebo. Sinusitis was considered as the persistence of clinically compatible symptoms for at least 10 days. The methodological quality was assessed using the Jadad scale. Four RCTs were selected. We studied the following variables: cure, clinical improvement (on days 10 to 14), relapse-recurrence (from day 14 to day 60) and presence of adverse effects. The results were combined using meta-analysis. We used the fixed effects model or random model depending on whether or not there was heterogeneity. We estimated the combined relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
Only two RCTs had a Jadad scale score ≥3. Variable cure-improvement (4 RCTs): RR 1.11 (95% CI: 0.9 to 1.3). Variable relapse-recurrence (3 RCTs): RR 0.9 (95% CI: 0.6 to 1.5). Adverse effects (4 RCTs): 2.01 (95% CI 1.1 to 3.8).
CONCLUSIONS
In children with acute sinusitis, antibacterial agents at the studied doses did not appear to provide benefit in terms of cure and improvement, assessed at 10 to 14 days of follow up. Similarly, the percentage of relapse-recurrence was not lower among children who received antibiotics. Antibiotics are associated more frequently with adverse effects.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sinusitis
PubMed: 21237732
DOI: 10.1016/j.anpedi.2010.10.011 -
Cureus Aug 2022The coronavirus can infect the upper respiratory tract, sinuses, and nose, and its severity manifests in its respiratory symptoms and neurological and psychological... (Review)
Review
The coronavirus can infect the upper respiratory tract, sinuses, and nose, and its severity manifests in its respiratory symptoms and neurological and psychological consequences. The majority of people who have COVID-19 present with moderate flu-like illness, and patients who are elderly with comorbid conditions, such as hypertension and diabetes, are more prone to experience severe illness and death. However, in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, neurological consequences have become a substantial source of morbidity and mortality. COVID-19 poses a global hazard to the nervous system because of its widespread dispersion and multiple pathogenic pathways. This review offers a critical assessment of the acute and long-term neurological effects of the COVID-19 virus. Some neurological problems include headache, dizziness, myalgia/fatigue, meningitis, ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke, and myelitis. Other people who have contracted COVID-19 also exhibit neurological features such as loss of taste and smell, reduced consciousness, and Guillain-Barré syndrome. This study seeks to help neurologists comprehend the wide range of neurologic aspects of COVID-19, as understanding neurological symptoms may help with the management and enhance the patient's outcomes.
PubMed: 36168382
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.28309 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2014Acute sinusitis is the inflammation and swelling of the nasal and paranasal mucous membranes and is a common reason for patients to seek primary care consultations. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute sinusitis is the inflammation and swelling of the nasal and paranasal mucous membranes and is a common reason for patients to seek primary care consultations. The related impairment of daily functioning and quality of life is attributable to symptoms such as facial pain and nasal congestion.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of systemic corticosteroids on clinical response rates and to determine adverse effects and relapse rates of systemic corticosteroids compared to placebo or standard clinical care in children and adults with acute sinusitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February week 1, 2014) and EMBASE (January 2009 to February 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing systemic corticosteroids to placebo or standard clinical care for patients with acute sinusitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of the trials and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
Five RCTs with a total of 1193 adult participants met our inclusion criteria. We judged methodological quality to be moderate in four trials and high in one trial. Acute sinusitis was defined clinically in all trials. However, the three trials performed in ear, nose and throat (ENT) outpatient clinics also used radiological assessment as part of their inclusion criteria. All participants were assigned to either oral corticosteroids (prednisone 24 mg to 80 mg daily or betamethasone 1 mg daily) or the control treatment (placebo in four trials and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in one trial). In four trials antibiotics were prescribed in addition to oral corticosteroids or control treatment, while one trial investigated the effects of oral corticosteroids as a monotherapy.When combining data from the five trials, participants treated with oral corticosteroids were more likely to have short-term resolution or improvement of symptoms than those receiving the control treatment: at days three to seven (risk ratio (RR) 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 1.6; risk difference (RD) 17%, 95% CI 6% to 29%) and at days four to 14 (RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.5; RD 14%, 95% CI 1% to 27%). A sensitivity analysis including the four trials with placebo as a control treatment showed similar results but with a lesser effect size: at days three to seven (RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.3; RD 11%, 95% CI 4% to 17%) and days four to 14 (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.2; RD 8%, 95% CI 2% to 13%). Statistical heterogeneity was high for many analyses. Subgroup analyses revealed that corticosteroid monotherapy had no beneficial effects. Furthermore, scenario analysis showed that outcomes missing from the trial reports might have introduced attrition bias (a worst-case scenario showed no statistically significant beneficial effect of oral corticosteroids). No trial reported effects on relapse or recurrence rates. Reported side effects in patients treated with oral corticosteroids were mild (nausea, vomiting, gastric complaints) and did not significantly differ from those receiving placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Oral corticosteroids as a monotherapy appear to be ineffective for adult patients with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis. Current data on the use of oral corticosteroids as an adjunctive therapy to oral antibiotics are limited: almost all trials are performed in secondary care settings and there is a significant risk of bias. This limited evidence suggests that oral corticosteroids in combination with antibiotics may be modestly beneficial for short-term relief of symptoms in acute sinusitis, with a number needed to treat to benefit of seven for resolution or symptom improvement. A large primary care factorial trial is needed to establish whether oral corticosteroids offer additional benefits over antibiotics in acute sinusitis.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Betamethasone; Humans; Prednisone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sinusitis
PubMed: 24664368
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008115.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2013Sore throat is a common reason for people to present for medical care. Although it remits spontaneously, primary care doctors commonly prescribe antibiotics for it. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sore throat is a common reason for people to present for medical care. Although it remits spontaneously, primary care doctors commonly prescribe antibiotics for it.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits of antibiotics for sore throat for patients in primary care settings.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 6, MEDLINE (January 1966 to July week 1, 2013) and EMBASE (January 1990 to July 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of antibiotics versus control assessing typical sore throat symptoms or complications.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. We resolved differences in opinion by discussion. We contacted trial authors from three studies for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 trials with 12,835 cases of sore throat. We did not identify any new trials in this 2013 update. 1. Symptoms Throat soreness and fever were reduced by about half by using antibiotics. The greatest difference was seen at day three. The number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) to prevent one sore throat at day three was less than six; at week one it was 21. 2. Non-suppurative complications The trend was antibiotics protecting against acute glomerulonephritis but there were too few cases to be sure. Several studies found antibiotics reduced acute rheumatic fever by more than two-thirds within one month (risk ratio (RR) 0.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.60). 3. Suppurative complications Antibiotics reduced the incidence of acute otitis media within 14 days (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.58); acute sinusitis within 14 days (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.08 to 2.76); and quinsy within two months (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.47) compared to those taking placebo. 4. Subgroup analyses of symptom reduction Antibiotics were more effective against symptoms at day three (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.71) if throat swabs were positive for Streptococcus, compared to RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.97 if negative. Similarly at week one the RR was 0.29 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.70) for positive and 0.73 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.07) for negative Streptococcus swabs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antibiotics confer relative benefits in the treatment of sore throat. However, the absolute benefits are modest. Protecting sore throat sufferers against suppurative and non-suppurative complications in high-income countries requires treating many with antibiotics for one to benefit. This NNTB may be lower in low-income countries. Antibiotics shorten the duration of symptoms by about 16 hours overall.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Pharyngitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rheumatic Fever
PubMed: 24190439
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000023.pub4 -
OTO Open 2022This review aimed to systematically determine the optimal nasal saline regimen for different types of sinonasal diseases. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to systematically determine the optimal nasal saline regimen for different types of sinonasal diseases.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov. The last search was on December 6, 2021.
REVIEW METHODS
Study selection was done by 2 independent authors. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses were included. The effects of nasal saline treatment through various devices, saline tonicities, and buffer statuses were evaluated in patients with allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, acute and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), CRS with cystic fibrosis, and postoperative care, including septoplasty/turbinoplasty and endoscopic sinus surgery.
RESULTS
Sixty-nine studies were included: 10 meta-analyses and 59 randomized controlled trials. For allergic rhinitis, large-volume devices (≥60 mL) were effective for treating adults, while low-volume devices (5-59 mL) were effective for children. Isotonic saline was preferred over hypertonic saline due to fewer adverse events. For acute rhinosinusitis, saline irrigation was beneficial in children, but it was an option for adults. Large-volume devices were more effective, especially in the common cold subgroup. For CRS, large-volume devices were effective for adults, but saline drop was the only regimen that had available data in children. Buffered isotonic saline was more tolerable than nonbuffered or hypertonic saline. The data for CRS with cystic fibrosis and nonallergic rhinitis were limited. For postoperative care, buffered isotonic saline delivered by large-volume devices was effective.
CONCLUSION
Nasal saline treatment is recommended for treating most sinonasal diseases. Optimal delivery methods for each condition should be considered to achieve therapeutic effects of saline treatment.
PubMed: 35720767
DOI: 10.1177/2473974X221105277 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2015The common cold is a frequent illness, which, although benign and self limiting, results in many consultations to primary care and considerable loss of school or work... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The common cold is a frequent illness, which, although benign and self limiting, results in many consultations to primary care and considerable loss of school or work days. Current symptomatic treatments have limited benefit. Corticosteroids are an effective treatment in other upper respiratory tract infections and their anti-inflammatory effects may also be beneficial in the common cold. This updated review has included one additional study.
OBJECTIVES
To compare corticosteroids versus usual care for the common cold on measures of symptom resolution and improvement in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 4), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group's Specialised Register, the Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (2015, Issue 2), NHS Health Economics Database (2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1948 to May week 3, 2015) and EMBASE (January 2010 to May 2015).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing corticosteroids to placebo or to standard clinical management.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We were unable to perform meta-analysis and instead present a narrative description of the available evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three trials (353 participants). Two trials compared intranasal corticosteroids to placebo and one trial compared intranasal corticosteroids to usual care; no trials studied oral corticosteroids. In the two placebo-controlled trials, no benefit of intranasal corticosteroids was demonstrated for duration or severity of symptoms. The risk of bias overall was low or unclear in these two trials. In a trial of 54 participants, the mean number of symptomatic days was 10.3 in the placebo group, compared to 10.7 in those using intranasal corticosteroids (P value = 0.72). A second trial of 199 participants reported no significant differences in the duration of symptoms. The single-blind trial in children aged two to 14 years, who were also receiving oral antibiotics, had inadequate reporting of outcome measures regarding symptom resolution. The overall risk of bias was high for this trial. Mean symptom severity scores were significantly lower in the group receiving intranasal steroids in addition to oral amoxicillin. One placebo-controlled trial reported the presence of rhinovirus in nasal aspirates and found no differences. Only one of the three trials reported on adverse events; no differences were found. Two trials reported secondary bacterial infections (one case of sinusitis, one case of acute otitis media; both in the corticosteroid groups). A lack of comparable outcome measures meant that we were unable to combine the data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence does not support the use of intranasal corticosteroids for symptomatic relief from the common cold. However, there were only three trials, one of which was very poor quality, and there was limited statistical power overall. Further large, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in adults and children are required to answer this question.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Androstadienes; Beclomethasone; Child; Child, Preschool; Common Cold; Female; Fluticasone; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26461493
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008116.pub3 -
Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 2016The inflammatory diseases of the nose, rhino-pharynx and paranasal sinuses (allergic and non allergic rhinitis, NARES; rhinosinusitis with/without nasal polyposis,... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
The inflammatory diseases of the nose, rhino-pharynx and paranasal sinuses (allergic and non allergic rhinitis, NARES; rhinosinusitis with/without nasal polyposis, adenoidal hypertrophy with/without middle ear involvement) clinically manifest themselves with symptoms and complications severely affecting quality of life and health care expenditure. Intranasal administration of corticosteroids, being fast, simple, and not requiring cooperation, is the preferred way to treat the patients, to optimize their quality of life, at the same time minimizing the risk of exacerbations and complications. Among the different topical steroids available on the market, we performed a comparative analysis in terms of effectiveness and safety between mometasone furoate (MF) and its main competitors. Searching through Pub Med and Google Scholar and using as entries "mometasone furoate", "rhinitis", "sinusitis", "asthma", "polyposis", "otitis media with effusion", and "adenoid hypertrophy" we found 344 articles, 300 of which met the eligibility criteria. Taking into account relevance and date of publication, a sample of 40 articles was considered for the review. MF effectiveness for treatment and/or prophylaxis of nasal symptoms in seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis has been fully established with a level of evidence Ia. Even though it has not been assessed for MF in particular, topical steroids are the most appropriate treatment in mixed rhinitis and NARES. In acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) evidences support their use as mono-therapy or as adjuvant to antibiotics for reducing the recurrence rate, and decrease the usage of related prescriptions and medical consultations. In chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with Nasal polyposis, MF reduces polyps size, nasal congestion, improves quality of life and sense of smell and it is also effective in the treatment of daytime cough. The topical use of MF has great efficacy in the management of adenoidal hypertrophy and otitis media of atopic children. As regards the safety, MF has demonstrated an excellent safety profile: pregnant women can safely use it; no systemic effects on growth velocity and adrenal suppression have been shown; no changes in epithelial thickness or atrophy have been observed after long term administration of the drug.
CONCLUSIONS
MF has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of the inflammatory diseases of the nose and paranasal sinuses; when compared to its competitors it shows a greater symptom control; it is a reliable treatment in the long term thanks not only to its proven efficacy, but also to its safety being on the market since more than 17 years.
PubMed: 27141307
DOI: 10.1186/s40248-016-0054-3