Comparison of antibiotics with placebo for treatment of acute sinusitis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Outpatient Point-of-Care Ultrasound

The most commonly used outpatient primary care point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) applications are similar to those used in the inpatient setting (eg, cardiac, pulmonary, and abdominal ultrasound). However, there are several additional POCUS applications that are highly applicable to the outpatient setting and should be considered for use by primary care practitioners. This article reviews 3 outpatient POCUS applications and their potential role in the primary care setting.

Antibiotics Versus Placebo for Acute Bacterial Conjunctivitis: Findings From a Cochrane Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To summarize key findings from a Cochrane review of the benefits and safety of antibiotic therapy compared with placebo (or vehicle) for acute bacterial conjunctivitis.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We included placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared topical antibiotics with placebo. We followed Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and evidence synthesis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one RCTs involving 8805 participants with acute bacterial conjunctivitis were included. Fifteen (71%) RCTs examined fluoroquinolone (FQ) drops, 3 tested macrolides, alone or in combination with steroids, and another 3 compared other non-FQ antibiotics. Intention-to-treat estimates suggested that compared with placebo, antibiotics may increase clinical recovery by 26% (risk ratio [RR]: 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.46) at the end of therapy (5 RCTs, 1474 participants). Modified intention-to-treat estimates, in which only participants with laboratory-confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis were analyzed, indicated that antibiotics were associated with 53% higher likelihood of microbiological cure as compared with placebo (RR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.34-1.74; 10 RCTs, 2827 participants). Non-FQs (RR: 4.05; 95% CI: 1.36-12.00), but not FQs (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54-0.90), were likely to increase treatment-associated ocular complications such as eye pain, discomfort, and allergic reactions; the certainty of level of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate level certainty of evidence suggested that antibiotics may increase the likelihood of clinical recovery and microbiological clearance compared with placebo. Very low-level certainty of evidence suggested that antibiotics may be associated with potential harm in patients with acute bacterial conjunctivitis, but the potential risk of bias from study design, inconsistency in outcome measurement, and reporting limit the evidence to very low certainty.

Antimicrobial treatment of ENT infections

Ear, nose and throat (ENT) or upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) are the most common infections in children and the leading causes of antibiotic prescriptions. In most cases, these infections are due to (or are triggered by) viruses and even when bacterial species are implicated, recovery is usually spontaneous. The first imperative is to refrain from prescribing antibiotics in a large number of URTIs: common cold, most cases of sore throat, laryngitis, congestive otitis, and otitis media with effusion. On the contrary, a decision to treat sore throats with antibiotics is based primarily on the positivity of the Group A Streptococcus (GAS) rapid antigen diagnostic tests. For ear infections, only (a) purulent acute otitis media in children under 2 years of age and (b) complicated or symptomatic forms of purulent acute otitis media (PAOM) in older children should be treated with antibiotics. Amoxicillin is the first-line treatment in the most cases of ambulatory ENT justifying antibiotics. Severe ENT infections (mastoiditis, epiglottitis, retro- and parapharyngeal abscesses, ethmoiditis) are therapeutic emergencies necessitating hospitalization and initial intravenous antibiotic therapy.

Safety of a New Sinus Irrigation Device in Rhinosinusitis: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Puncture and lavage of the paranasal sinuses, previously the primary treatment for unresponsive acute bacterial rhinosinusitis before surgery, has been abandoned due to procedural discomfort and advancements in antibiotic efficacy and endoscopic surgery. The rise in antibiotic-resistant bacteria has renewed the interest in minimally invasive sinus lavage to both avoid aggressive surgical interventions and identify appropriate antibiotic therapy. In this article, we describe the safety and feasibility of a new device in human patients and evaluate its efficacy as a treatment before the traditional sinus surgery in acute rhinosinusitis.

METHODS

The device with its seeker-shaped guiding tube and rotating wire can enter the sinus cavity through the natural ostium, pulverize the inspissated mucus, and enable lavage and culture sampling without the need for sinus puncturing. It was tested in 6 patients with chronic sinusitis under general anesthesia during endoscopic sinus surgery and in additional 10 patients with maxillary acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in outpatient settings under local anesthesia.

RESULTS

The device enabled rapid, efficient, and atraumatic insertion of the wire into the occluded sinuses. The rotating wire permitted pulverization of the thick mucus, which enabled irrigation without mucosal damage or adverse events. Overall, 9 of 10 patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis demonstrated remarkable improvements and were discharged the following day with no acute symptoms. The visual analog scale score for pain dropped from 8.9 to 0.4. The remaining one patient underwent endoscopic sinus surgery subsequently. None of the patients treated during endoscopic sinus surgery developed any adverse events.

Antibiotics versus placebo for acute bacterial conjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Acute bacterial conjunctivitis is an infection of the conjunctiva and is one of the most common ocular disorders in primary care. Antibiotics are generally prescribed on the basis that they may speed recovery, reduce persistence, and prevent keratitis. However, many cases of acute bacterial conjunctivitis are self-limited, resolving without antibiotic therapy. This Cochrane Review was first published in The Cochrane Library in 1999, then updated in 2006, 2012, and 2022.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and side effects of antibiotic therapy in the management of acute bacterial conjunctivitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2022, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May 2022), Embase (January 1980 to May 2022), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases in May 2022.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which any form of antibiotic treatment, with or without steroid, had been compared with placebo/vehicle in the management of acute bacterial conjunctivitis. This included topical and systemic antibiotic treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of identified studies. We assessed the full text of all potentially relevant studies and determined the included RCTs, which were further assessed for risk of bias using Cochrane methodology. We performed data extraction in a standardized manner and conducted random-effects meta-analyses using RevMan Web.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 eligible RCTs, 10 of which were newly identified in this update. A total of 8805 participants were randomized. All treatments were topical in the form of drops or ointment. The trials were heterogeneous in terms of their eligibility criteria, the nature of the intervention (antibiotic drug class, which included fluoroquinolones [FQs] and non-FQs; dosage frequency; duration of treatment), the outcomes assessed and the time points of assessment. We judged one trial to be of high risk of bias, four as low risk of bias, and the others as raising some concerns. Based on intention-to-treat (ITT) population, antibiotics likely improved clinical cure (resolution of clinical symptoms or signs) by 26% (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.46; 5 trials, 1474 participants; moderate certainty) as compared with placebo. Subgroup analysis showed no differences by antibiotic class (P = 0.67) or treatment duration (P = 0.60). In the placebo group, 55.5% (408/735) of participants had spontaneous clinical resolution by days 4 to 9 versus 68.2% (504/739) of participants treated with an antibiotic. Based on modified ITT population, in which participants were analyzed after randomization on the basis of positive microbiological culture, antibiotics likely increased microbiological cure (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.74; 10 trials, 2827 participants) compared with placebo at the end of therapy; there were no subgroup differences by drug class (P = 0.60). No study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic treatment. Patients receiving antibiotics had a lower risk of treatment incompletion than those in the placebo group (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.78; 13 trials, 5573 participants; moderate certainty) and were 27% less likely to have persistent clinical infection (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.81; 19 trials, 5280 participants; moderate certainty). There was no evidence of serious systemic side effects reported in either the antibiotic or placebo group (very low certainty). When compared with placebo, FQs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90) but not non-FQs (RR 4.05, 95% CI 1.36 to 12.00) may result in fewer participants with ocular side effects. However, the estimated effects were of very low certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this update suggest that the use of topical antibiotics is associated with a modestly improved chance of resolution in comparison to the use of placebo. Since no evidence of serious side effects was reported, use of antibiotics may therefore be considered to achieve better clinical and microbiologic efficacy than placebo. Increasing the proportion of participants with clinical cure or increasing the speed of recovery or both are important for individual return to work or school, allowing people to regain quality of life. Future studies may examine antiseptic treatments with topical antibiotics for reasons of cost and growing antibiotic resistance.

Reflexology for acute rhinosinusitis - Results from a blinded, early-phase comparative trial

BACKGROUND

Reflexology is commonly used as an adjunct to conventional treatment by patients with respiratory tract infections. The effect of reflexology needs to be tested in a full-scale randomized controlled study. Small early-phase trials can give an indication on whether full-size clinical trials are warranted. The objective of this study is to determine whether the study design is feasible in a full-scale study of reflexology as an add-on to usual care compared to usual care alone in acute rhinosinusitis, and further if there is a statistical indication of an effect of reflexology warranting a full-scale study.

METHODS

20 patients with symptoms compatible with acute rhinosinusitis, and an illness duration of 28 days or less were randomized to additional reflexology treatment along with usual medical care, or usual care alone. The patients scored how much each of 16 sinus-related symptoms bothered them in the past few days on a six-point scale (zero = no problem to five = severe problem). To determine if there is a statistical indication of an effect of reflexology warranting a full-scale study, the separation test was used.

RESULTS

The methodology was considered feasible and could therefore be applied in a full-scale study of reflexology for acute rhinosinusitis. The mean reduction in symptom score from baseline to day two was 0.95 in the reflexology group and 0.78 in the control group. From baseline to day ten the mean reduction in symptom score was 2.12 in the reflexology group and 1.63 in the control group. A statistical indication of effect in a full-scale study in favor of reflexology was found from baseline to day ten but not from baseline to day two.

CONCLUSIONS

The research methodology in this study could be used in a full-scale study of reflexology in acute sinusitis. The results from the separation test indicates an effect warranting a full-scale study of reflexology regarding effects in acute sinusitis ten days after treatment.

Antibiotic adverse effects in pediatric acute rhinosinusitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pediatric acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) is often treated with oral antibiotics, with limited insight into adverse effects (AEs) across drug classes. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we characterize AE incidence associated with oral antibiotics in these patients.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

We searched PubMed and Embase for English-language articles published from 1985 to September 2020 reporting AEs of oral antibiotic therapy for ABRS patients aged 0-18 years. Six-hundred and sixty-six articles underwent title and abstract screening, identifying 154 articles for full-length review.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included, most of which reported individual and aggregate AE incidences. Amoxicillin/clavulanate, amoxicillin, cephalosporin/carbacephem, and placebo groups were identified. Random-effects meta-analysis of prospective groups identified appreciable incidences of diarrhea and abdominal pain, and low incidence of rash, for amoxicillin-clavulanate and amoxicillin. All antibiotics as well as placebo were associated with non-zero overall AE incidence. Children receiving antibiotics were about twice as likely to incur any AE during treatment in placebo-controlled studies, though this association was not significant. High heterogeneity limited most point estimates, with risk of bias, typically in outcomes measurement, detected in most studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of AEs associated with oral antibiotic use in pediatric ABRS is limited in current literature. Adverse effects are non-negligible, but may not significantly exceed placebo.

Anti-infective dyes in the time of COVID

The phenomenal global upheaval caused by SARS-CoV-2 has produced amazing responses from science and healthcare, particularly in the rapid realisation and production of vaccines. However, until early 2020 global infection control research was highly focused on rapidly increasing rates of conventional antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the supply of drugs to counter this. Antimicrobial dyes have been suggested by various authors for inclusion in this effort, usually with little return from responsible authorities, and normally on the basis of post-treatment staining or potential toxicity, but this does not deny the fact that such dyes, particularly with photoactivation, are the only class of agents with pan-microbial activity - i.e. against each of bacteria, viruses, fungi and protozoa - regardless of the organism's drug resistance status. Conventional antibacterials, antivirals etc. usually demonstrate activity against one particular section of pathogens only, and disinfectants such as chlorhexidine or benzalkonium salts are too toxic for internal use. This perspective reflects both the background utility of antimicrobial dyes and ways forward for their inclusion in 21st Century infection control protocols.

[The evolution of methods of active irrigation of paranasal sinuses in rhinosinusitis. Part 2]

Inflammation of the paranasal sinuses significantly reduces the quality of life of people and causes marked economic damage to society. The striking clinical picture of sinusitis has always forced doctors to study the disease, as evidenced by the first records of the anatomy and diseases of the paranasal sinuses by doctors in ancient Egypt more than 3.000 years BC. Sinusitis has been treated in different ways in different historical periods. Effective medication treatment appeared relatively recently and began to steadily replace the older instrumental methods, to which many people had a preconceived notion of invasiveness. However, many studies are showing the positive effect of active drainage methods and, moreover, there is data showing that the discomfort during such procedures is slightly higher than during dental treatment under local anesthesia. This article presents a review of the available scientific literature on the use of different treatments for bacterial rhinosinusitis at different historical stages, ranging from the first publications on puncture techniques to balloon dilatation and the modern approach to conservative treatment.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021

I.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR-RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR-RS-2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence-based findings of the document.

METHODS

ICAR-RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence-based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence-based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary.

RESULTS

ICAR-RS-2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence-based management algorithm is provided.

CONCLUSION

This ICAR-RS-2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence-based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS.

[Systemic and local antibiotic therapy for acute sinusitis]

The purpose of the study was to summarize data on modern antibiotic therapy for acute sinusitis, the role and place of topical antibacterial drugs, in particular Fluimucil-Antibiotic, in modern treatment strategies for this disease.

METHODS

Search in the PUBMED electronic database (articles and related abstracts) for the keywords «acute sinusitis", «antibiotics», «thiamphenicol glycinate acetylcysteine» «biofilm», «respiratory tract infection», «N-acetylcysteine».

RESULTS

The published research results indicate the high antibacterial activity of the Fluimucil-Antibiotic, in particular, for the topical drug use in the form of inhalations, applications, irrigation, and instillations. The published research results indicate a wide spectrum of antimicrobial action of Fluimucil-Antibiotic, its ability to destroy biofilms and prevent their formation, good pharmacokinetics, safety, which makes it possible to consider it as a potential treatment option for acute sinusitis in everyday practice.

Recommendations for antibiotic prescriptions for upper respiratory symptoms in children in Trinidad and Tobago: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT APPROACH

Background: In Trinidad and Tobago, 22,329 and 18,594 cases of acute respiratory infections (ARI) in children less than 5 years were recorded for 2016 and 2017 respectively. Often, antimicrobials are over prescribed without proof of bacterial infection. Recommendations for management of ARIs are needed. Methods: The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach was used to formulate recommendations. We established a guideline panel who met in person or by web conferences. We prioritised recommendation questions and searched for guidelines and systematic reviews from 2010 to July 2018 in several medical databases and guideline producer websites. We also searched for patients’ values and preferences, acceptability, resources, and feasibility studies specific to the Caribbean or Trinidad and Tobago. We summarised the evidence in evidence-to-decision frameworks and formulated recommendations by consensus. Results: The guideline panel developed recommendations including: 1. For children 5 years old or younger who present with fever and respiratory symptoms not suggestive of serious illness, we recommend to either not prescribe antibiotics or to provide a delayed prescription (48 hours later) of amoxicillin or clarithromycin (when children have a history of allergy to penicillin) rather than an immediate prescription; 2. For children with symptoms suggestive of serious illness, we recommend immediate prescription of amoxicillin or clarithromycin (when children have a history of allergy to penicillin); and, 3. We suggest 7-10 days of treatment, depending on the suspected illness and antibiotic used. Conclusion: Guidelines aid medical practitioners, patients and supply chain managers. This guideline will form the backbone of the 1st national standardisation of treatment using the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach.

[The effectiveness of local therapy of acute inflammatory diseases of the upper respiratory tract]

Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) is one of the most common diseases in outpatient practice with a steady tendency to increase of complicated forms in recent years. The risk of antibiotic resistance makes it necessary to search for effective pathogenetic methods of ABRS treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of inhalation therapy with compressor nebulizer using Fluimucil Antibiotic IT in the treatment of ABRS and acute laryngotracheitis in outpatient practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with ABRS were divided into two sex- and age-matched groups of 26 people each. The first group was treated with 250 mg of Fluimucil Antibiotic IT inhalations by the use of Norditalia HI-NEB compressor nebulizer once a day. The second group was treated with amoxicillin/clavulanate 875 mg + 125 mg orally two times a day.

RESULTS

In the first group, the cough disappeared significantly earlier (on day 5-6) than in the second group (on day 7-8). In the first group, nasal congestion also disappeared significantly earlier (on day 3-5) than in the second group (on day 4-6). There was no significant difference in the reduction of intoxication syndrome and nasal secretions in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Local antibacterial and mucolytic therapy in the initial stages of ABRS and acute laryngotracheitis reduces rhinological symptoms and coughing, similar to systemic antibacterial therapy. The use of Fluimucil Antibiotic IT in the early stages of the treatment provides an opportunity to avoid systemic antibiotics, which reduces the risk of antibiotic resistance as well as side effects in patients.

Update on the diagnostic considerations for neurogenic nasal and sinus symptoms: A current review suggests adding a possible diagnosis of migraine

BACKGROUND

Treatment of rhinosinusitis (RS) is one of the leading reasons for prescriptions of antibiotics, although they often fail to provide symptomatic relief. Appropriately diagnosing and treating patients presenting with RS for whom antibiotic therapy has failed or who have normal CT findings is a controversial topic. One explanation is that what these patients are experiencing is misinformation from the trigeminal nerve and autonomic nervous system. Midfacial pain and pressure with rhinorrhea and nasal congestion do not represent an infectious, or even inflammatory, condition within the sinus or nasal cavities, but a mirage that is best treated as a migraine variant. Observations Although there is not enough research to definitively prove this alternate etiology, we are reaching a tipping point where the clinical implications, real-world experience, and evolving literature support this possible alternate etiology. Four key factors support a midfacial migraine that mimics RS: 1) Pathophysiology: current pathophysiology literature offers a model of how migraine attacks could replicate clinical presentations of RS; 2) Clinical presentation: patients with infectious RS and midfacial migraine have similar symptomatic presentation, similar demographics, but poorly correlated radiological information; 3) Diagnosis: clinical studies support the proposition that there are alternative diagnostic tools for distinguishing patients with midfacial migraine; and 4) Prognosis: Select RS patients show significant improvement with migraine treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We encourage medical professionals to consider migraine disease as a form of sensory misinformation and as a possible etiology of RS complaints. Clinicians can ask validated questions to determine if possible migraine could be an underlying cause, and there are standard preventative treatments for migraine that could alleviate patient symptoms. Dysfunctional vasomotor activity may be the root of the disturbances, particularly when antibiotic therapy fails and CT findings are discordant with symptoms. Until there is a diagnostic test for migraine, clinicians need to question a patient's self-diagnosis of rhinosinusitis. More research is needed to definitively answer this important question.

Antibiotics for acute rhinosinusitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Acute rhinosinusitis is an acute infection of the nasal passages and paranasal sinuses that lasts less than four weeks. Diagnosis of acute rhinosinusitis is generally based on clinical signs and symptoms in ambulatory care settings. Technical investigations are not routinely performed, nor are they recommended in most countries. Some trials show a trend in favour of antibiotics, but the balance of benefit versus harm is unclear.We merged two Cochrane Reviews for this update, which comprised different approaches with overlapping populations, resulting in different conclusions. For this review update, we maintained the distinction between populations diagnosed by clinical signs and symptoms, or imaging.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment in adults with acute rhinosinusitis in ambulatory care settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2017, Issue 12), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (January 1950 to January 2018), Embase (January 1974 to January 2018), and two trials registers (January 2018). We also checked references from identified trials, systematic reviews, and relevant guidelines.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment in people with rhinosinusitis-like signs or symptoms or sinusitis confirmed by imaging.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data about cure and side effects and assessed the risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information as required.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials involving 3057 participants. Of the 15 included trials, 10 appeared in our 2012 review, and five (631 participants) are legacy trials from merging two reviews. No new studies were included from searches for this update. Overall, risk of bias was low. Without antibiotics, 46% of participants with rhinosinusitis, whether or not confirmed by radiography, were cured after 1 week and 64% after 14 days. Antibiotics can shorten time to cure, but only 5 to 11 more people per 100 will be cured faster if they receive antibiotics instead of placebo or no treatment: clinical diagnosis (odds ratio (OR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.54; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 19, 95% CI 10 to 205; I² = 0%; 8 trials; high-quality evidence) and diagnosis confirmed by radiography (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.39; NNTB 10, 95% CI 5 to 136; I² = 0%; 3 trials; moderate-quality evidence). Cure rates with antibiotics were higher when a fluid level or total opacification in any sinus was found on computed tomography (OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.75 to 13.72; NNTB 4, 95% CI 2 to 15; 1 trial; moderate-quality evidence). Purulent secretion resolved faster with antibiotics (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.22; NNTB 10, 95% CI 6 to 35; I² = 0%; 3 trials; high-quality evidence). However, 13 more people experienced side effects with antibiotics compared to placebo or no treatment (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.74 to 2.82; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 8, 95% CI 6 to 12; I² = 16%; 10 trials; high-quality evidence). Five fewer people per 100 will experience clinical failure if they receive antibiotics instead of placebo or no treatment (Peto OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.63; NNTH 19, 95% CI 15 to 27; I² = 21%; 12 trials; high-quality evidence). A disease-related complication (brain abscess) occurred in one participant (of 3057) one week after receiving open antibiotic therapy (clinical failure, control group).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The potential benefit of antibiotics to treat acute rhinosinusitis diagnosed either clinically (low risk of bias, high-quality evidence) or confirmed by imaging (low to unclear risk of bias, moderate-quality evidence) is marginal and needs to be seen in the context of the risk of adverse effects. Considering antibiotic resistance, and the very low incidence of serious complications, we conclude there is no place for antibiotics for people with uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis. We could not draw conclusions about children, people with suppressed immune systems, and those with severe sinusitis, because these populations were not included in the available trials.

High-dose versus standard-dose amoxicillin/clavulanate for clinically-diagnosed acute bacterial sinusitis: A randomized clinical trial

Background

The recommended treatment for acute bacterial sinusitis in adults, amoxicillin with clavulanate, provides only modest benefit.

Objective

To see if a higher dose of amoxicillin will lead to more rapid improvement.

Design, setting, and participants

Double-blind randomized trial in which, from November 2014 through February 2017, we enrolled 315 adult outpatients diagnosed with acute sinusitis in accordance with Infectious Disease Society of America guidelines.

Interventions

Standard-dose (SD) immediate-release (IR) amoxicillin/clavulanate 875 /125 mg (n = 159) vs. high-dose (HD) (n = 156). The original HD formulation, 2000 mg of extended-release (ER) amoxicillin with 125 mg of IR clavulanate twice a day, became unavailable half way through the study. The IRB then approved a revised protocol after patient 180 to provide 1750 mg of IR amoxicillin twice a day in the HD formulation and to compare Time Period 1 (ER) with Time Period 2 (IR).

Main measure

The primary outcome was the percentage in each group reporting a major improvement—defined as a global assessment of sinusitis symptoms as “a lot better” or “no symptoms”—after 3 days of treatment.

Key results

Major improvement after 3 days was reported during Period 1 by 38.8% of ER HD versus 37.9% of SD patients (P = 0.91) and during Period 2 by 52.4% of IR HD versus 34.4% of SD patients, an effect size of 18% (95% CI 0.75 to 35%, P = 0.04). No significant differences in efficacy were seen at Day 10. The major side effect, severe diarrhea at Day 3, was reported during Period 1 by 7.4% of HD and 5.7% of SD patients (P = 0.66) and during Period 2 by 15.8% of HD and 4.8% of SD patients (P = 0.048).

Conclusions

Adults with clinically diagnosed acute bacterial sinusitis were more likely to improve rapidly when treated with IR HD than with SD but not when treated with ER HD. They were also more likely to suffer severe diarrhea. Further study is needed to confirm these findings.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02340000.

Patterns of Migraine Disease in Otolaryngology: A CHEER Network Study

Objective

To evaluate the prevalence of migraine disease in an otolaryngologic cohort and migraine-related otologic and sinonasal symptoms in this population.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study utilizing the CHEER (Creating Healthcare Excellence through Education and Research) network for recruitment.

Setting

Patients were recruited in a cross-sectional and pragmatic manner in 14 CHEER sites between June 2015 and March 2017 (9 academic, 5 community based).

Subjects and Methods

Patients were included if they were aged ≥18 years and seen for any concern that was not head and neck cancer. Patients with any history of brain abnormality or headaches that began within 2 weeks of a medical illness, trauma, or head injury were excluded. Patients were screened for migraine with a validated instrument. If they screened positive on the Migraine Assessment Tool (MAT+), the subjects also filled out validated and custom questionnaires for sinonasal, otologic, and migraine-specific symptoms.

Results

Of 1458 patients screened, 235 (16.1%) screened positive for migraine (MAT+), which is higher than general population (13%, P < .001). The MAT+ group was significantly younger (47.2 vs 55.6 years of age, P < .001) and predominantly women (80.0% vs 55.9%, P < .001). The MAT+ cohort commonly reported ear- and sinus-related symptoms, such as tinnitus (70.5%), ear pressure (61.9%), balance problems (82%), facial pressure (85%), and rhinorrhea (49.9%). There were significantly higher levels of sinus burden with higher levels of dizziness handicap, Jonckheere-Terpstra test = 11,573.00, z = 7.471, P < .001.

Conclusion

Migraine disease has a higher prevalence in an otolaryngologic cohort than in the general population, presenting with a high rate of sinonasal and otologic symptoms that may be due to or exacerbated by migraines.

Symptomatic treatment of uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections in the ambulatory setting: randomised, double blind trial

Objective To investigate whether symptomatic treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is non-inferior to antibiotics in the treatment of uncomplicated lower urinary tract infection (UTI) in women, thus offering an opportunity to reduce antibiotic use in ambulatory care.Design Randomised, double blind, non-inferiority trial.Setting 17 general practices in Switzerland.Participants 253 women with uncomplicated lower UTI were randomly assigned 1:1 to symptomatic treatment with the NSAID diclofenac (n=133) or antibiotic treatment with norfloxacin (n=120). The randomisation sequence was computer generated, stratified by practice, blocked, and concealed using sealed, sequentially numbered drug containers.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was resolution of symptoms at day 3 (72 hours after randomisation and 12 hours after intake of the last study drug). The prespecified principal secondary outcome was the use of any antibiotic (including norfloxacin and fosfomycin as trial drugs) up to day 30. Analysis was by intention to treat.Results 72/133 (54%) women assigned to diclofenac and 96/120 (80%) assigned to norfloxacin experienced symptom resolution at day 3 (risk difference 27%, 95% confidence interval 15% to 38%, P=0.98 for non-inferiority, P<0.001 for superiority). The median time until resolution of symptoms was four days in the diclofenac group and two days in the norfloxacin group. A total of 82 (62%) women in the diclofenac group and 118 (98%) in the norfloxacin group used antibiotics up to day 30 (risk difference 37%, 28% to 46%, P<0.001 for superiority). Six women in the diclofenac group (5%) but none in the norfloxacin group received a clinical diagnosis of pyelonephritis (P=0.03).Conclusion Diclofenac is inferior to norfloxacin for symptom relief of UTI and is likely to be associated with an increased risk of pyelonephritis, even though it reduces antibiotic use in women with uncomplicated lower UTI.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01039545.

The potential role of amlodipine on experimentally induced bacterial rhinosinusitis

INTRODUCTION

Antibiotics are frequently used for the treatment of rhinosinusitis. Concerns have been raised regarding the adverse effects of antibiotics and growing resistance. The lack of development of new antibiotic compounds has increased the necessity for exploration of non-antibiotic compounds that have antibacterial activity. Amlodipine is a non-antibiotic compound with anti-inflammatory activity.

OBJECTIVE

In this study we aimed to investigate the potential role of amlodipine in the treatment of rhinosinusitis by evaluating its effects on tissue oxidative status, mucosal histology and inflammation.

METHODS

Fifteen adult albino guinea pigs were inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus and treated with saline, cefazolin sodium, or amlodipine for 7 days. The control group was composed by five healthy guinea pigs. Animals were sacrificed after the treatment. Histopathological changes were identified using Hematoxylin-Eosin staining. Inflammation was assessed by Polymorphonuclear Leukocyte infiltration density. Tissue levels of antioxidants (superoxide dismutase, glutathione) and an oxidative product (malondialdehyde) were determined.

RESULTS

In rhinosinusitis induced animals, amlodipine reduced loss of cilia, lamina propria edema and collagen deposition compared to placebo (saline) and although not superior to cefazolin, amlodipine decreased polymorphonuclear leukocyte infiltration. The superoxide dismutase activity and glutathione levels were reduced, whereas the malondialdehyde levels were increased significantly in all three-treatment groups compared to the control group. Amlodipine treated group showed significantly increased superoxide dismutase and glutathione levels and decreased malondialdehyde levels compared to all treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

The non-antibiotic compound amlodipine may have a role in acute rhinosinusitis treatment through tissue protective, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms.

Nasal saline irrigation with or without systemic antibiotics in treatment of children with acute rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVES

Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is a common pediatric problem. Our aim was to determine the efficacy of normal nasal saline irrigation (NSI) with or without amoxicillin in treatment of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) in children.

METHODS

It is a prospective randomized, blind placebo-controlled trial. Children with uncomplicated ARS were recruited. One group received (amoxacillin 100mg/kg/day) and 0.9% NSI. The second group received placebo and 0.9% NSI. The primary outcome was the effect of treatment on clinical response. Secondary outcomes included: Rating of Pediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (PRQLQ), middle meatus (MM) bacteriological and cytological cellular responses and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Sixty two patients with ARS were eligible for the study. In amoxicillin group (31 patients); clinical cure was observed in 26 (83.9%) in comparison to 22 (71%) patients in NSI without antibiotics group (31 patients) (p=0.22). No differences between both groups in the reported nasal symptom scores and total symptoms scores improvements at day 7 (p=0.09 and 0.65) and day 14 (p=0.29 and 0.14), respectively. The mean total PRQLQ values had no differences between both groups after the 2 weeks of treatment (p=0.06). At day 7, MM neutrophils reduced significantly in amoxicillin group in comparison to placebo group (p=0.004). At day 14, the MM cytological content had no differences between both groups (p=0.07). Normal NSI with placebo has less reported adverse effects than amoxicillin and nasal saline irrigations (p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NSI can be used alone with the same clinical, bacteriological and cytological cellular changes efficacy and with higher safety profile than amoxicillin after 14 days of treatment in uncomplicated clinically diagnosed ARS in children.

WITHDRAWN: Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults

Currently, two separate Cochrane reviews, ‘Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults ’ and ‘Antibiotics for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis in adults ’ describe the effect of antibiotics for acute rhinosinusitis. Although both Cochrane reviews study the same condition, they look at different populations (patients in which the diagnosis was based on clinical signs and symptoms and patients in which the diagnosis was confirmed by imaging). Because of this, the conclusions are different in these Cochrane reviews. This was confusing for clinicians who needed to read both Cochrane reviews to know which conclusions are most applicable to their patients.
 
 This review is being withdrawn and will be incorporated into the updated publication of ‘Antibiotics for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis in adults ’. This ‘merged’ review will still maintain the relevant distinction between the two populations. However, information on the effectiveness of antibiotics for rhinosinusitis will be published in the ‘merged’ Cochrane review. We will omit the comparison between antibiotics (as published in this Cochrane review) because the choice for certain antibiotics and/or doses differs according to the local antibiotic resistance patterns and therefore this comparison is less relevant.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Clinical practice guideline (update): adult sinusitis

OBJECTIVE

This update of a 2007 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology--Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence-based recommendations to manage adult rhinosinusitis, defined as symptomatic inflammation of the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the update group, evidence from 42 new systematic reviews, enhanced information on patient education and counseling, a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships, expanded opportunities for watchful waiting (without antibiotic therapy) as initial therapy of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS), and 3 new recommendations for managing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in managing adult rhinosinusitis and to create explicit and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specifically, the goals are to improve diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, promote appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management, and promote judicious use of systemic and topical therapy, which includes radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians (1) should distinguish presumed ABRS from acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) caused by viral upper respiratory infections and noninfectious conditions and (2) should confirm a clinical diagnosis of CRS with objective documentation of sinonasal inflammation, which may be accomplished using anterior rhinoscopy, nasal endoscopy, or computed tomography. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should either offer watchful waiting (without antibiotics) or prescribe initial antibiotic therapy for adults with uncomplicated ABRS; (2) should prescribe amoxicillin with or without clavulanate as first-line therapy for 5 to 10 days (if a decision is made to treat ABRS with an antibiotic); (3) should reassess the patient to confirm ABRS, exclude other causes of illness, and detect complications if the patient worsens or fails to improve with the initial management option by 7 days after diagnosis or worsens during the initial management; (4) should distinguish CRS and recurrent ARS from isolated episodes of ABRS and other causes of sinonasal symptoms; (5) should assess the patient with CRS or recurrent ARS for multiple chronic conditions that would modify management, such as asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia; (6) should confirm the presence or absence of nasal polyps in a patient with CRS; and (7) should recommend saline nasal irrigation, topical intranasal corticosteroids, or both for symptom relief of CRS. The update group stated as options that clinicians may (1) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation for symptomatic relief of viral rhinosinusitis; (2) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation) for symptomatic relief of ABRS; and (3) obtain testing for allergy and immune function in evaluating a patient with CRS or recurrent ARS. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should not obtain radiographic imaging for patients who meet diagnostic criteria for ARS, unless a complication or alternative diagnosis is suspected, and (2) should not prescribe topical or systemic antifungal therapy for patients with CRS.

Diseases of the nose and paranasal sinuses in child

Diseases of the pediatric nose and nasal sinuses as well as neighboring anatomical structures encompass a variety of pathologies, especially of inflammatory nature. Congenital disease, such as malformations and structural deviations of the nasal septum, as well as systemic metabolic pathologies affecting the nose and sinuses, rarely require medical therapy from an Otolaryngologist. The immunological function of the mucosa and genetic factors play a role in the development of disease in the pediatric upper airway tract, especially due to the constantly changing anatomy in this growth phase. Disease description of the nose and nasal sinuses due to mid-facial growth must also take developmental age differences (infant, toddler, preschool, and school age) into account. Epidemiological examinations and evidence based studies are often lacking in the pediatric population. The wide range of inflammatory diseases of the nose and paranasal sinuses, such as the acute and chronic rhinosinusitis, the allergic rhinitis, and adenoid disease, play a role in the susceptibility of a child to infection. The susceptibility to infection depends on the pediatric age structure (infant, young child) and has yet to be well defined. The acute rhinosinusitis in children develops after a viral infection of the upper airways, also referred to as the "common cold" in the literature. It usually spontaneously heals within ten days without any medical therapy. Antibiotic therapy is prudent in complicated episodes of ARS. The antibiotic therapy is reserved for children with complications or associated disease, such as bronchial asthma and/or chronic bronchitis. A chronic rhinosinusitis is defined as the inflammatory change in the nasal mucosa and nasal sinus mucosa, in which the corresponding symptoms persist for over 12 weeks. The indication for CT-imaging of the nasal sinuses is reserved for cases of chronic rhinosinusitis that have been successfully treated with medication. A staged therapeutic concept is followed in CRS based on conservative and surgical methods. Nasal sinus surgery is considered nowadays as effective and safe in children. Based on the assumption that adenoids are a reservoir for bacteria, from which recurrent infections of the nose and nasal sinus originate, the adenoidectomy is still defined as a cleansing procedure in rhinosinusitis. 69.3% of the children had benefit from adenoidectomy. Comorbidities, such as pediatric bronchial asthma, presently play an even more important role in the therapy of rhinosinusitis; therefore, it is often wise to have the support of pediatricians. In western European countries 40% of children presently suffer from allergic rhinitis, in which pronounced nasal obstruction can cause disturbed growth in facial bones. An early therapy with SIT may prevent the development of bronchial asthma and secondary sensitization to other allergens. Therefore, SIT is recommended in treatment of allergic rhinitis whenever, if possible. The assessment of diagnostic tools is for the examiner not often possible due to the lack of evidence. Rhinosurgical approaches are often described in study reports; however, they lack the standard prospective randomized long-term study design required nowadays and can only be evaluated with caution in the literature.

A comparison of the efficacy of amoxicillin and nasal irrigation in treatment of acute sinusitis in children

Purpose

The efficacy of antibiotic therapy for acute sinusitis is controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of amoxicillin with nasal irrigation and nasal irrigation alone for acute sinusitis in children.

Methods

This randomized, double-blind, controlled study included 80 children aged 4-15 years with a clinical presentation of acute sinusitis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either amoxicillin (80 mg/kg/day) in 3 divided doses orally for 14 days with saline nasal irrigation (for 5 days) and 0.25% phenylephrine (for 2 days) or the same treatment without amoxicillin. Clinical improvements in their initial symptoms were assessed on days 3, 14, 21, and 28.

Results

On day 3, patients in the amoxicillin with nasal irrigation group showed significant clinical improvement (P=0.001), but there was no significant difference in the degree of improvement between the amoxicillin with nasal irrigation and nasal irrigation alone groups during follow-up (P>0.05). In addition, no significant differences were seen in age, sex, and degree of improvement between groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

High-dose amoxicillin with saline nasal irrigation relieved acute sinusitis symptoms faster and more often than saline nasal irrigation alone. However, antibiotic treatment for acute sinusitis confers only a small therapeutic benefit over nasal irrigation.

Antibiotics for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Sinusitis is one of the most common diagnoses among adults in ambulatory care, accounting for 15% to 21% of all adult outpatient antibiotic prescriptions. However, the role of antibiotics for sinusitis is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antibiotics in adults with acute maxillary sinusitis by comparing antibiotics with placebo, antibiotics from different classes and the side effects of different treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 2, MEDLINE (1946 to March week 3, 2013), EMBASE (1974 to March 2013), SIGLE (OpenSIGLE, later OpenGrey (accessed 15 January 2013)), reference lists of the identified trials and systematic reviews of placebo-controlled studies. We also searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We imposed no language or publication restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotics with placebo or antibiotics from different classes for acute maxillary sinusitis in adults. We included trials with clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis, confirmed or not by imaging or bacterial culture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed trial quality. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for differences between intervention and control groups in whether the treatment failed or not. All measures are presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We conducted the meta-analyses using either the fixed-effect or random-effects model. In meta-analyses of the placebo-controlled studies, we combined data across antibiotic classes. Primary outcomes were clinical failure rates at 7 to 15 days and 16 to 60 days follow-up. We used GRADEpro to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 studies in this updated review; nine placebo-controlled studies involving 1915 participants (seven of the studies clearly conducted in primary care settings) and 54 studies comparing different classes of antibiotics (10 different comparisons). Five studies at low risk of bias comparing penicillin or amoxicillin to placebo provided information on the main outcome: clinical failure rate at 7 to 15 days follow-up, defined as a lack of full recovery or improvement, for participants with symptoms lasting at least seven days. In these studies antibiotics decreased the risk of clinical failure (pooled RR of 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94, 1084 participants randomised, 1058 evaluated, moderate quality evidence). However, the clinical benefit was small. Cure or improvement rates were high in both the placebo group (86%) and the antibiotic group (91%) in these five studies. When clinical failure was defined as a lack of full recovery (n = five studies), results were similar: antibiotics decreased the risk of failure (pooled RR of 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.85, high quality evidence) at 7 to 15 days follow-up.Adverse effects in seven of the nine placebo-controlled studies (comparing penicillin, amoxicillin, azithromycin or moxicillin to placebo) were more common in antibiotic than in placebo groups (median of difference between groups 10.5%, range 2% to 23%). However, drop-outs due to adverse effects were rare in both groups: 1.5% in antibiotic groups and 1% in control groups.In the 10 head-to-head comparisons, none of the antibiotic preparations were superior to another. However, amoxicillin-clavulanate had significantly more drop-outs due to adverse effects than cephalosporins and macrolides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate evidence that antibiotics provide a small benefit for clinical outcomes in immunocompetent primary care patients with uncomplicated acute sinusitis. However, about 80% of participants treated without antibiotics improved within two weeks. Clinicians need to weigh the small benefits of antibiotic treatment against the potential for adverse effects at both the individual and general population levels.

Principles of judicious antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in pediatrics

Most upper respiratory tract infections are caused by viruses and require no antibiotics. This clinical report focuses on antibiotic prescribing strategies for bacterial upper respiratory tract infections, including acute otitis media, acute bacterial sinusitis, and streptococcal pharyngitis. The principles for judicious antibiotic prescribing that are outlined focus on applying stringent diagnostic criteria, weighing the benefits and harms of antibiotic therapy, and understanding situations when antibiotics may not be indicated. The principles can be used to amplify messages from recent clinical guidelines for local guideline development and for patient communication; they are broadly applicable to antibiotic prescribing in general.

Evidence for the diagnosis and treatment of acute uncomplicated sinusitis in children: a systematic review

In 2001, the American Academy of Pediatrics published clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS) in children. The technical report accompanying those guidelines included 21 studies that assessed the diagnosis and management of ABS in children. This update to that report incorporates studies of pediatric ABS that have been performed since 2001. Overall, 17 randomized controlled trials of the treatment of sinusitis in children were identified and analyzed. Four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antimicrobial therapy have been published. The results of these studies varied, likely due to differences in inclusion and exclusion criteria. Because of this heterogeneity, formal meta-analyses were not performed. However, qualitative analysis of these studies suggests that children with greater severity of illness at presentation are more likely to benefit from antimicrobial therapy. An additional 5 trials compared different antimicrobial therapies but did not include placebo groups. Six trials assessed a variety of ancillary treatments for ABS in children,and 3 focused on subacute sinusitis. Although the number of pediatric trials has increased since 2001, there are still limited data to guide the diagnosis and management of ABS in children. Diagnostic and treatment guidelines focusing on severity of illness at the time of presentation have the potential to identify those children most likely to benefit from antimicrobial therapy and at the same time minimize unnecessary use of antibiotics

[Consensus document on the aetiology, diagnosis and treatment of sinusitis]

The Spanish National Consensus (Spanish Society of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Spanish Association of Primary Care Pediatrics, Spanish Society of Pediatric Outpatient and Primary Care, Spanish Society of Otorhinolaryngology and Cervical-Facial Pathology) on Sinusitis is presented. Rhinosinusitis is a difficult to diagnose and often unrecognised disease. The document discusses the aetiology, the clinical signs and symptoms, and the diagnostic criteria. A proposal for treatment is made based on the epidemiological situation in our country. Oral amoxicillin is the treatment of choice (80mg/kg/day divided every 8hours). Alternative treatment is proposed in special cases and when amoxicillin is not sufficient. The main complications are reviewed.

Characterisation of patients receiving moxifloxacin for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in clinical practice: results from an international, observational cohort study

We conducted a prospective, non-controlled, multi-centre Phase IV observational cohort study of patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis who were treated with moxifloxacin in clinical practice in 19 countries in Asia Pacific, Europe and the Middle East. With the data collected we evaluated the presentation and course of the current disease episode, particularly in terms of the principal clinical signs and symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis and diagnostic procedures. A final assessment of moxifloxacin therapy was made to evaluate the impact of the sinusitis episode on activities of daily life and on sleep disturbance, and to evaluate the clinical outcome of treatment. A total of 7,090 patients were enrolled, of whom 3909 (57.6%) were included in the valid for clinical outcome and safety population. Regional differences were observed in the main symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis and, according to several characteristics, disease episodes appeared to be more severe in patients in Europe than in the Asia Pacific or Middle East regions. The sinusitis episode impacted on daily living for mean (SD) periods of 3.6 (3.2), 4.6 (3.9) and 3.1 (3.0) days and disturbed sleep for 3.6 (3.2), 4.6 (3.9) and 3.1 (3.0) nights in the Asia Pacific, Europe and Middle East regions, respectively. With moxifloxacin treatment, the mean (SD) time to improvement of symptoms was 3.0 (1.5), 3.4 (1.6) and 3.2 (1.5) days, and the time to resolution of symptoms was 4.8 (2.6) days, 5.7 (2.4) days and 5.5 (2.5) days, in the Asia Pacific, Europe and Middle East regions, respectively. In conclusion, acute rhinosinusitis remains a substantial health burden with significant impact on patients’ quality of life, and there are differences between global regions in the clinical presentation, diagnosis and clinical course of disease episodes. Moxifloxacin was an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in the overall population.

Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00930488

A retrospective comparison of acute rhinosinusitis outcomes in patients prescribed antibiotics, mometasone furoate nasal spray, or both

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are frequently used to treat acute rhinosinusitis (ARS; acute sinusitis), although many episodes are viral. Because of community resistance concerns, current evidence provides limited support for the use of antibiotics in ARS. We conducted a retrospective comparative effectiveness outcomes assessment of the nasal steroid mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) versus antibiotics among ARS patients in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using the General Practice Research Database (United Kingdom), the earliest ARS event between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2008 (index event) for patients aged 12-75 years and an antibiotic or MFNS prescription ±2 days was identified. Treatment cohorts were MFNS monotherapy (MM), MFNS + antibiotic (MAT), and antibiotic monotherapy (AM). Logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders and compared odds of rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters and related prescriptions in the 3- to 30-day postindex period.

RESULTS

There were 12,679 eligible patients (651 MM; 2285 MAT; 9743 AM). Compared with the reference cohort AM, during the 3- to 30-day postindex period, lower adjusted odds (p < 0.001) of having one or more rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters was observed for MM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.58) and MAT (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.62); having one or more rhinosinusitis-related prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.63) and MAT (OR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.52-0.65); having one or more antibiotic, nasal steroid, or oral steroid prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.28-0.46) and MAT (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.46-0.58); and having one or more antibiotic prescriptions for MM (OR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.33-0.58) and MAT (OR = 0.63; 95% CI, (0.55-0.72).

CONCLUSION

Compared with AM, using MFNS for initial ARS treatment, alone or with an antibiotic, is associated with a decreased likelihood of both subsequent rhinosinusitis-related medical encounters and use of related prescriptions.

Antibiotics for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis in adults

BACKGROUND

In primary care settings, the diagnosis of rhinosinusitis is generally based on clinical signs and symptoms. Technical investigations are not routinely performed, nor recommended. Individual trials show a trend in favour of antibiotics, but the balance of benefit versus harm is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of antibiotics in adults with clinically diagnosed rhinosinusitis in primary care settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2012), MEDLINE (January 1950 to February week 4, 2012) and EMBASE (January 1974 to February 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antibiotics versus placebo in participants with rhinosinusitis-like signs or symptoms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials involving 2450 participants. Overall, the risk of bias in these studies was low. Irrespective of the treatment group, 47% of participants were cured after one week and 71% after 14 days. Antibiotics can shorten the time to cure, but only five more participants per 100 will cure faster at any time point between 7 and 14 days if they receive antibiotics instead of placebo (number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB)) 18 (95% confidence interval (CI) 10 to 115, I(2) statistic 0%, eight trials). Purulent secretion resolves faster with antibiotics (odds ratio (OR) 1.58 (95% CI 1.13 to 2.22)), (NNTB 11, 95% CI 6 to 51, I(2) statistic 0%, three trials). However, 27% of the participants who received antibiotics and 15% of those who received placebo experienced adverse events (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.77) (number needed to treat to harm (NNTH)) 8 (95% CI 6 to 13, I(2) statistic 13%, seven trials). More participants in the placebo group needed to start antibiotic therapy because of an abnormal course of rhinosinusitis (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.66), NNTH 20 (95% CI 14 to 35, I(2) statistic 0%, eight trials). Only one disease-related complication (brain abscess) occurred in a patient treated with antibiotics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The potential benefit of antibiotics in the treatment of clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis needs to be seen in the context of a high prevalence of adverse events. Taking into account antibiotic resistance and the very low incidence of serious complications, we conclude that there is no place for antibiotics for the patient with clinically diagnosed, uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis. This review cannot make recommendations for children, patients with a suppressed immune system and patients with severe disease, as these populations were not included in the available trials.

IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Bacterial Rhinosinusitis in Children and Adults

Evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and initial management of suspected acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in adults and children were prepared by a multidisciplinary expert panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America comprising clinicians and investigators representing internal medicine, pediatrics, emergency medicine, otolaryngology, public health, epidemiology, and adult and pediatric infectious disease specialties. Recommendations for diagnosis, laboratory investigation, and empiric antimicrobial and adjunctive therapy were developed.

Complications of acute rhinosinusitis in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Despite the evidence demonstrating that antibiotics are of little benefit in acute rhinosinusitis (ARS), GPs continue to prescribe them, possibly in an attempt to prevent potentially dangerous complications. In this study, we present epidemiological data about the incidence, course and severity of such complications in the Netherlands.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all patients hospitalized in The Netherlands in 2004 with a complication of ARS. Records were made of the symptoms of ARS and the complication, demographics, medical history, medical treatment preceding hospitalization, diagnostic techniques, therapeutic management, course and outcome.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients with 48 complications (16 intracranial and 32 orbital) were included. In the intracranial group (mean age 35.9 years), six patients had been treated with oral antibiotics prior to hospitalization. While hospitalized, all patients were treated with intravenous antibiotics and 15 underwent surgery. Eight patients recovered fully after treatment, three patients had residual symptoms and three patients died (missing data: 2). Of the 31 patients with orbital complications (mean age 17.4 years), 14 received oral antibiotics before admission. While hospitalized, all patients were treated with intravenous antibiotics and 13 underwent surgery. Twenty-seven patients recovered fully and two had residual symptoms (missing data: 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe ARS complications occur in an otherwise healthy population in an estimated 1:12,000 paediatric and 1:32,000 adult cases in the Netherlands. Our study suggests that antibiotic treatment of ARS in general practice does not play a role in preventing complications.

Amoxicillin for acute rhinosinusitis: a randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT

Evidence to support antibiotic treatment for acute rhinosinusitis is limited, yet antibiotics are commonly used.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incremental effect of amoxicillin treatment over symptomatic treatments for adults with clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of adults with uncomplicated, acute rhinosinusitis were recruited from 10 community practices in Missouri between November 1, 2006, and May 1, 2009.

INTERVENTIONS

Ten-day course of either amoxicillin (1500 mg/d) or placebo administered in 3 doses per day. All patients received a 5- to 7-day supply of symptomatic treatments for pain, fever, cough, and nasal congestion to use as needed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was improvement in disease-specific quality of life after 3 to 4 days of treatment assessed with the Sinonasal Outcome Test-16 (minimally important difference of 0.5 units on a 0-3 scale). Secondary outcomes included the patient's retrospective assessment of change in sinus symptoms and functional status, recurrence or relapse, and satisfaction with and adverse effects of treatment. Outcomes were assessed by telephone interview at days 3, 7, 10, and 28.

RESULTS

A total of 166 adults (36% male; 78% with white race) were randomized to amoxicillin (n = 85) or placebo (n = 81); 92% concurrently used 1 or more symptomatic treatments (94% for amoxicillin group vs 90% for control group; P = .34). The mean change in Sinonasal Outcome Test-16 scores was not significantly different between groups on day 3 (decrease of 0.59 in the amoxicillin group and 0.54 in the control group; mean difference between groups of 0.03 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.19]) and on day 10 (mean difference between groups of 0.01 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.15]), but differed at day 7 favoring amoxicillin (mean difference between groups of 0.19 [95% CI, 0.024 to 0.35]). There was no statistically significant difference in reported symptom improvement at day 3 (37% for amoxicillin group vs 34% for control group; P = .67) or at day 10 (78% vs 80%, respectively; P = .71), whereas at day 7 more participants treated with amoxicillin reported symptom improvement (74% vs 56%, respectively; P = .02). No between-group differences were found for any other secondary outcomes. No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with acute rhinosinusitis, a 10-day course of amoxicillin compared with placebo did not reduce symptoms at day 3 of treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00377403.

Canadian clinical practice guidelines for acute and chronic rhinosinusitis

This document provides healthcare practitioners with information regarding the management of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to enable them to better meet the needs of this patient population. These guidelines describe controversies in the management of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) and include recommendations that take into account changes in the bacteriologic landscape. Recent guidelines in ABRS have been released by American and European groups as recently as 2007, but these are either limited in their coverage of the subject of CRS, do not follow an evidence-based strategy, or omit relevant stakeholders in guidelines development, and do not address the particulars of the Canadian healthcare environment.

Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of CRS, along with the development of appropriate therapeutic strategies, have improved outcomes for patients with CRS. CRS now affects large numbers of patients globally and primary care practitioners are confronted by this disease on a daily basis. Although initially considered a chronic bacterial infection, CRS is now recognized as having multiple distinct components (eg, infection, inflammation), which have led to changes in therapeutic approaches (eg, increased use of corticosteroids). The role of bacteria in the persistence of chronic infections, and the roles of surgical and medical management are evolving. Although evidence is limited, guidance for managing patients with CRS would help practitioners less experienced in this area offer rational care. It is no longer reasonable to manage CRS as a prolonged version of ARS, but rather, specific therapeutic strategies adapted to pathogenesis must be developed and diffused.

Guidelines must take into account all available evidence and incorporate these in an unbiased fashion into management recommendations based on the quality of evidence, therapeutic benefit, and risks incurred. This document is focused on readability rather than completeness, yet covers relevant information, offers summaries of areas where considerable evidence exists, and provides recommendations with an assessment of strength of the evidence base and degree of endorsement by the multidisciplinary expert group preparing the document.

These guidelines have been copublished in both Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology and the Journal of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

Effectiveness of antibiotics for acute sinusitis in real-life medical practice

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT

Determining bacterial aetiology of acute sinusitis is difficult without employing invasive procedures. Most episodes of acute sinusitis resolve spontaneously. Antibiotics have demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of acute bacterial sinusitis in clinical trials yet little is known of their effectiveness in real-life treatment settings.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

Most cases of untreated acute sinusitis resolved spontaneously. Antibiotics were more effective when given within the first 10 days of treatment. This had no effect on later recurrence. Patients with poor oro-dental condition or recent antibiotic use may derive the most benefit from an antibiotic prescription and this should be considered by prescribers. The antibiotics used were found to be equally effective. Existing recommendations to identify acute sinusitis with high probability of bacterial origin, such as the French recommendations, fever or duration of symptoms fail to identify patients in whom antibiotics are more effective.

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of antibiotics in acute bacterial sinusitis.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study with 2 months follow-up of 5640 patients with acute sinusitis included by a random sample from 1174 GPs and 120 ENT specialists. Main outcomes were short-term initial success, defined as the absence of prescription of (another) antibiotic or sinus lavage within 10 days, and lack of recurrence between the 11th and 60th day, after initial success.

RESULTS

Initial success was found in 88.7% (95% CI 85.1, 91.4%) of patients without antibiotic prescription at inclusion and 96.2% (95% CI 95.7, 96.7%) of patients prescribed antibiotics. The 10 day adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for treatment failure (new antibiotic prescription or sinus drainage) with initial antibiotics compared with no antibiotics was 0.30 (95% CI 0.21, 0.42) with no difference between antibiotics. Antibiotics were more effective in patients with poor oro-dental condition (HR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01, 0.20) and in patients who had already used antibiotics during the previous 2 months (HR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03, 0.28). For patients without failure at 10 days, recurrence between the 11th and 60th day was similar whether or not they had initially been prescribed an antibiotic, 94.1% (95% CI 93.4, 94.7%) and 93.4% (95%CI 90.3, 95.5%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Most acute sinusitis cases not prescribed antibiotics resolve spontaneously. Antibiotics reduced by 3.3-fold the risk of failure within 10 days, without impact on later recurrence. The greatest benefit of antibiotics was found for patients with poor oro-dental condition or with antibiotic use within the previous 2 months.