-
Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology... Sep 2021Although it is known that oral antihistamine-pseudoephedrine combination tablets have a faster onset than intranasal corticosteroid sprays in the treatment of allergic... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
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.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adult; Anti-Allergic Agents; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Female; Fluticasone; Humans; Loratadine; Male; Middle Aged; Nasal Cavity; Nasal Decongestants; Nasal Sprays; Pseudoephedrine; Respiratory Physiological Phenomena; Rhinitis, Allergic; Tablets; Young Adult
PubMed: 34000435
DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2021.05.001 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2011Acute sinusitis is defined pathologically, by transient inflammation of the mucosal lining of the paranasal sinuses lasting less than 4 weeks. Clinically, it is... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acute sinusitis is defined pathologically, by transient inflammation of the mucosal lining of the paranasal sinuses lasting less than 4 weeks. Clinically, it is characterised by nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, facial pain, hyposmia, sneezing, and, if more severe, additional malaise and fever. It affects 1% to 5% of the adult population each year in Europe.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, and in people with radiologically or bacteriologically confirmed acute sinusitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2011 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid [co-amoxiclav], doxycycline, cephalosporins, macrolides; different doses, long-course regimens), antihistamines, decongestants (xylometazoline, phenylephrine, pseudoephedrine), saline nasal washes, steam inhalation, and topical corticosteroids (intranasal).
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Amoxicillin; Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate Combination; Double-Blind Method; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Macrolides; Sinusitis
PubMed: 22189346
DOI: No ID Found -
European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology,... Feb 2015Due to their vasoconstrictive action on the nasal mucosa, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are highly efficient amines for relief of nasal congestion. As with any... (Review)
Review
Due to their vasoconstrictive action on the nasal mucosa, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are highly efficient amines for relief of nasal congestion. As with any vasoconstrictor and as underscored by the French Society of Otorhinolaryngology in its 2011 guideline, these molecules should not be used in patients under the age of 15. Furthermore, due to unpredictable severe cardiovascular and neurological adverse events that may occur even at low dose and in the absence of any pre-existing pathology, they should not be prescribed for the common cold, and ENT physicians must carefully weigh the risk/benefit ratio in patients with allergic rhinitis. Distribution should be regulated and over-the-counter sales banned.
Topics: Ephedrine; Humans; Nasal Decongestants; Pseudoephedrine; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 25532441
DOI: 10.1016/j.anorl.2014.11.001 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2008Each year, children suffer up to 5 colds and adults have 2-3 infections, leading to time off school or work, and considerable discomfort. Most symptoms resolve within a... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Each year, children suffer up to 5 colds and adults have 2-3 infections, leading to time off school or work, and considerable discomfort. Most symptoms resolve within a week, but coughs often persist for longer.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for common cold? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to May 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 19 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: analgesics or anti-inflammatory drugs, antibiotics, antihistamines, decongestants (norephedrine, oxymetazoline, or pseudoephedrine), decongestants plus antihistamine, echinacea, steam inhalation, vitamin C, and zinc (intranasal gel or lozenges).
Topics: Acute Disease; Common Cold; Cough; Echinacea; Humans; Nasal Decongestants; Phenylpropanolamine
PubMed: 19450292
DOI: No ID Found