Treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis refractory to other treatments with topical antibiotic therapy delivered by means of a large-particle nebulizer: results of a controlled trial

Intranasal Spray Characteristics for Best Drug Delivery in Patients With Chronic Rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVES

To determine parameter combinations for effective drug delivery of intranasal spray steroids to the ostiomeatal complex (OMC) and maxillary sinus (MS) in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).

METHODS

Each patient's sinonasal cavity was reconstructed from computed tomography scans. Intranasal airflow and drug particle transport were simulated using computational fluid dynamic modeling. Airflow simulations were performed at 15 Pascal inhalation pressure. Intranasal spray particles of 1-100 μm were simulated at release speeds of 1, 5, and 10 m/s from 6 release locations (Bottom, Center, Top, Lateral, Lateral-Bottom, and Lateral-Top) at a nozzle insertion depth of 15 mm. Drug delivery simulations were performed in the head tilted forward position.

RESULTS

Maximal OMC deposition was 0.78%-12.44%, while maximal MS deposition was 0.02%-1.03% across all simulations. In general, particles between 6 and 10 μm had the best OMC (at 1 m/s particle velocity) and MS (at 10 m/s particle velocity) deposition. Particles ranging from 21 to 30 μm also had superior OMC deposition. The lateral and lateral-top spray release locations produced maximum OMC deposition, but no one release location demonstrated an increase in MS deposition.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study suggests that it is challenging to determine a common set of intranasal spray parameter combinations for effective drug delivery to the OMC and MSs. Although drug particle size and spray particle velocity seem to impact particle deposition patterns, spray release location appears to vary with anatomical differences between subjects, particularly when the MS is the target location for particle deposition. Laryngoscope, 133:1036-1043, 2023.

State of the Art Medical Management of Nasal Polyps

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is an inflammatory disease with a treatment goal of controlling symptoms and limiting disease burden. While endoscopic sinus surgery is effective for removing polyps and aerating sinuses, proper medical management remains necessary for reducing inflammation and limiting polyp recurrence.

OBJECTIVE

This article aims to summarize the literature regarding medical treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, with a specific focus on developments in the past 5 years.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a literature review using PubMed to identify studies assessing medical treatment strategies for patients with CRSwNP. Articles focusing on chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis were excluded unless specifically stated. Surgical treatment and biologic therapies for CRSwNP will be covered in subsequent chapters and are therefore not included.

RESULTS

Intranasal saline irrigations and topical steroids are mainstays of CRSwNP treatment in the pre-surgical, post-surgical, and maintenance phases of the disease. Alternative steroid delivery methods and adjunctive treatments with antibiotics, anti-leukotrienes, and other topical therapies have been investigated and may benefit certain patient populations, but convincing evidence does not exist to warrant addition of these treatments to the standard of care for CRSwNP.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical steroid therapy is clearly effective for CRSwNP, and recent studies demonstrate the safety and efficacy of high-dose nasal steroid rinses. Alternate delivery methods for local steroids may be useful for patients who are not responding to or who are noncompliant with conventional intranasal corticosteroid sprays and rinses. Future studies are needed to clarify if oral or topical antibiotics, oral anti-leukotrienes, or other novel therapies are significantly effective in decreasing symptoms and improving the quality of life in patients with CRSwNP.

Endoscopic outcomes in patients with AERD treated with topical antibiotics and intranasal corticosteroids

Background

Identifying effective therapy for recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) is a major challenge; and subtypes such as aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) are even more difficult to treat. Evidence on topical antibiotics use in (CRSwNP) is lacking. Current consensus guidelines recommend against its routine use, but recent reviews show some benefit when managing recalcitrant disease after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

Objective

Evaluate the effect of culture-directed topical antibiotics on sinonasal outcomes in AERD patients with a positive perioperative sinonasal bacterial culture who have undergone ESS.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of AERD patients with positive sinonasal culture, who underwent ESS from 2016 to 2021 was performed. Forty-four patients were identified and stratified based on their postoperative medical treatment. Twenty-six underwent postoperative intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) alone, while eighteen underwent INCS plus a 4-weeks treatment with topical antibiotics. SNOT-22 and Lund-Kennedy score (LKS) were assessed preoperatively and at 4-weeks and 4-6 months after ESS.

Results

A statistically significant improvement in the 4-weeks and 4-6 months postoperative SNOT-22 and LKS were noted within both groups (p<0.05). However, only a statistically significant difference was found in the 4-weeks postoperative LKS when comparing between treatment groups (p=0.01). Our linear regression model demonstrated a relationship between the use of combined therapy with INCS and topical antibiotics and the LKS 4-weeks post ESS (p=0.015).

Conclusion

In AERD patients with a confirmed sinus infection, the combination of culture-directed topical antibiotics and intranasal corticosteroid irrigations in the postoperative period can provide a short-term improvement in endoscopic scores.

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.

Current Perspective on Nasal Delivery Systems for Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis is an upper respiratory disease during which topical drug treatment via the nasal cavity is the most actively utilized therapeutic strategy. In addition to steroids, antibiotics, and antifungal agents, which are widely used in clinical practice, research on novel topical agents to improve the bacterial biofilm or mucociliary clearance remains ongoing. Moreover, owing to the complex structure of the nasal cavity, the effects of nasal drug delivery vary depending on factors related to delivery fluid dynamics, including device, volume, and compounds. In this article, we review methods and compounds that have been applied to chronic rhinosinusitis management and introduce recent advances and future perspectives in nasal drug delivery for upper respiratory diseases.

Topical Irrigations for Chronic Rhinosinusitis

As the understanding of the primary cause of chronic rhinosinusitis has shifted away from infection toward inflammation, topical corticosteroid sprays and saline irrigations have become mainstays of treatment. Topical corticosteroid irrigations are recommended particularly in the postoperative setting, but further research on their effect and possible hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression is needed. The popularity of topical antibiotics has subsequently waned with their use reserved for recalcitrant cases. Further research is needed on the effect of topical antifungals in allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. Topical alternative therapies that target biofilms have gained increasing recognition, and investigations on topical probiotics are on the horizon.

Topical antibiotic therapy in chronic rhinosinusitis: an update

BACKGROUND

Topical antibiotic therapies have been investigated for their use in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, society guidelines and evidence-based medicine reviews have recommended against the use of topical antibiotic therapy based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The purpose of this article is to review recent clinical research published since the aforementioned guidelines were published.

METHODS

A structured literature review was performed on clinical studies published in the last 5 years investigating the use of topical antibiotic therapies.

RESULTS

One double-blinded, randomized controlled trial (DB-RCT) supported the use of tobramycin using a vibrating aerosolizer; 1 non-blinded non-randomized controlled prospective trial lent support to use of topical ofloxacin for its anti-biofilm properties; and 1 meta-analysis found mupirocin irrigations to be beneficial in the short term. One Cochrane Review was unable to make a recommendation as no trial met the inclusion criteria. An additional systematic review found limited evidence to support the use of topical antibiotics with the exception of mupirocin irrigations that may be considered in Staphylococcus aureus infections. Two retrospective studies found that topical antibiotics change bacterial cultures of the sinuses.

CONCLUSION

There is additional evidence to support continuing investigation of topical antibiotic therapies. Further, larger RCTs are required to establish the efficacy of topical antibiotic therapies.

Consensus guidance of nebulizer therapy for acute rhinosinusitis

The guidance deals with the recommended applications, procedures, and safety management of nebulizer therapy for acute rhinosinusitis. In Japan, nebulizer therapy for sinusitis has been covered by public health insurance since 1958 and has been commonly carried out nationwide. The Japan Society for Infection and Aerosol in Otorhinolaryngology and the Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Society of Japan set up a working group to draw up a consensus guidance on nebulizer therapy for acute rhinosinusitis. The device for nebulizer therapy are classified into jet, ultrasound, and mesh types. In Japan, cefmenoxime hydrochloride (CMX) was approved for use in nebulizer therapy since 1996. The widening of the obstructed lesions such as large polyps prior to nebulizer therapy were recommended. The numbers of times of nebulizer therapy is recommended for three times in a week for at least for 2 weeks (cure rate: 68%, eradication ratio: 48%). Concerns should be pay for the changes of activity of medicine due to the mixing and bacterial contamination. Pseudomonas cepacia growing in a short even in both saline and distilled water leads to contamination at high concentrations by 2 days. Nebulizer therapy is an effective treatment based on a drug delivery system (DDS) to the nasal and paranasal cavities. The therapy effectively increases the local drug concentration by promptly and uniformly delivering drugs to a targeted local site. The therapy is safe with less systemic absorption and with few adverse reactions.

Pharmacological Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Current and Evolving Treatments

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory sinonasal condition with multiple etiologic factors that is associated with a vast economic cost. Treatment is most frequently pharmacologic and has centered on agents that ameliorate inflammation, decrease bacterial or pathogen load, and facilitate egress of mucus or purulence from the sinonasal cavity. Nasal saline irrigations, topical nasal steroids, certain antibiotics, and systemic steroids have shown some efficacy in the management of CRS. Recently, biologic therapeutics that target specific inflammatory pathways associated with subsets of CRS have been developed and evaluated. Early data evaluating these biologic treatments suggest a potential role in treating a subset of CRS with refractory, poorly controlled disease. Additional studies are necessary to identify which patients would benefit most from biologic therapies and to assess the cost of these therapies compared with the benefit they provide. This review describes the pathophysiology of CRS and summarizes both established and novel biologic pharmacologic treatments.

WITHDRAWN: Topical and systemic antifungal therapy for the symptomatic treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Since fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, there has been increasing controversy about the use of both topical and systemic antifungal agents in its management. Although interaction between the immune system and fungus has been demonstrated in CRS, this does not necessarily imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective its management.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 8 March 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised, placebo-controlled trials considering the use of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS and allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS). CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) or American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reviewed the titles and abstracts of all studies obtained from the searches and selected trials that met the eligibility criteria. We extracted data using a pre-determined data extraction form. There was significant heterogeneity of outcome data reporting with reports containing both parametric and non-parametric representations of data for the same outcomes. Means and standard deviations for change data were unavailable for a number of trials. Due to the limited reported data, we contacted authors and used original data for data analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies were included (380 participants). Five studies investigated topical antifungals and one study investigated systemic antifungals. The risk of bias in all included studies was low, with all trials being double-blinded and randomised. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo for any outcome. Symptom scores in fact statistically favoured the placebo group. Adverse event reporting was statistically significantly higher in the antifungal group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of this meta-analysis, there is no evidence to support the use of either topical or systemic antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.

Functional outcome after long-term low-dose trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in chronic rhinosinusitis with purulence: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole has been suggested as a treatment option for chronic rhinosinusitis with purulence. This study aimed to assess the functional and endoscopic outcomes after a three-month course of low-dose trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed, comprising patients referred to a tertiary care medical centre with a diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis with purulence. Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was prescribed at 960 mg/day for three months. Sinonasal complaints and endoscopic findings were documented, and bacteriological data were compared.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were included. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common bacterium cultured (86 per cent). Improvement in nasal function, as measured by the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test, was highly significant at three months (p < 0.0005). This improvement slightly decreased but remained significant at 6, 9 and 12 months. No side effects were noted. Endoscopic scores revealed similar and concordant improvements.

CONCLUSION

Long-term low-dose trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole therapy seems to be a safe option for selected patients. Additional randomised multicentre studies remain necessary.

Effectiveness of Topical Antibiotics on Staphylococcus Aureus Biofilm in Vitro

Background

In vitro biofilm-producing capacity in isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected from the sinus cavities after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) are associated with a poor outcome in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, conventional oral antibiotic therapy is frequently ineffective in eradicating bacteria in the biofilm form. Increasing the concentration of antibiotics may offer a means of countering this resistance. The aim of this study was to determine the in vitro activity of moxifloxacin (MOXI) against S. aureus in biofilm form (recovered from patients with CRS at least 1 year post-ESS).

Method

This study was performed in a research microbiology laboratory, where five isolates of S. aureus with known biofilm-forming capacity were cultured in Tryptic Soy Broth 0.5% glucose in 96-well plates at 37°C for 24 hours. After visual confirmation of biofilm formation, plates were incubated in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) or with MOXI at concentrations of 0.1×, 1×, 100×, and 1000× minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for an additional 24 hours. Biofilm from 3 wells of each concentration were collected and sonicated and the number of viable bacteria was determined by serial dilution and plating.

Results

After incubation, the number of viable bacteria was similar for nontreated and MOXI-treated biofilms at MIC and sub-MIC levels. However, MOXI at 1000X (0.1–0.2 mg/mL) gave a 2 to 2.5 log reduction in number of viable bacteria.

Conclusion

In vitro results show that increased concentrations of antibiotics, easily attainable in topical solutions, are effective in killing bacteria in bacterial biofilms. This suggests a role for topical antibiotic therapies in the treatment of biofilm infections.

Topical therapy for refractory rhinosinusitis caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: First report in a prospective series

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) associated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is rising and remains a therapeutic challenge. The goal of this study is to demonstrate the efficacy of a non-invasive topical therapy against MRSA in these patients.

METHODS

Seventeen patients with refractory CRS caused by MRSA were treated with a topical therapy protocol. Treatment consisted of weekly endoscopic sinus debridement followed by intra-sinus installation of a hydroxyl-ethylcellulose gel that releases mometasone and a culture-directed antibiotic for a period of 6 weeks, along with daily nasal nebulization of mometasone with the same antibiotic and saline rinses. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Lund-Kennedy (LK) symptom and endoscopic appearance scores. Sinus mucosal tissue was homogenized and cultured, and microbial biofilm burden was assessed based on colony forming units (CFUs) counts.

RESULTS

Rhinotopic therapy resulted in clearance of MRSA in 13 of 16 patients (81.2%). Treated patients also demonstrated significant improvement clinically as measured by the LK scores. In addition, a significant decrease in mucosal CFUs was observed post-therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that topical therapy is an effective method for treating MRSA-associated refractory CRS.

Update on Intranasal Medications in Rhinosinusitis

This review describes beneficial effects and adverse events of various intranasal medications in treating rhinosinusitis. Application of intranasal steroids has been described in treating all subtypes of adult rhinosinusitis, but reports are limited in pediatrics and mostly in acute pediatric subgroups resulted in benefits While saline irrigation is effective for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps and in pediatric acute rhinosinusitis, there is no evidence yet for saline drips and sprays. Application of intranasal antifungals and nasal irrigation with surfactant brings more harm than benefits. There is no evidence supporting the use of intranasal antibiotics. We also review influence of devices, methods, and patient head position on nasal and paranasal sinus drug delivery.

Culture-directed topical antibiotic treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Topical antibiotics, delivered optimally as high-volume culture-directed sinus irrigations, are being increasingly used for recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Their impact on subjective and objective outcome measures, however, is still unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess if the use of topical antibiotics in recalcitrant CRS is associated with improved 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test and Lund-Kennedy endoscopic scores, and to determine the negative posttreatment culture "control" rate.

METHODS

Patients were included in the study if they met diagnostic criteria for CRS, received high-volume topical antibiotic sinus irrigations twice daily for 1 month, between December 2009 and May 2015, and had undergone endoscopic sinus surgery. The primary outcome was the 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test score. Secondary outcomes were the Lund-Kennedy endoscopic score and a negative posttreatment culture "control" rate. Paired t-tests were used to compare pre- and posttreatment scores. Patients with cystic fibrosis were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Of the 58 patients included, 47% had nasal polyposis, 57% had asthma, 16% had aspirin sensitivity, and 55% had environmental allergies. The median Lund-Mackay computed tomography score was 11 (interquartile range, 6-16), and the median time to follow-up was 8 weeks (interquartile range, 6-10 weeks). The 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test scores improved from pre- to posttreatment period, although this was not significant mean 1.5 [confidence interval {CI} 1.3, 1.7] to mean 1.3 [CI 1.1, 1.6]; p = 0.16). Lund-Kennedy endoscopic scores, however, significantly improved from pre- to posttreatment (mean 4.9 [CI 4.3, 5.6] to mean 4.1 [CI 3.5, 4.7]; p = 0.05). Of the 47 patients with complete culture data, 72% had negative posttreatment culture results, defined as "controlled." Only one patient discontinued treatment, related to discomfort from irrigations.

CONCLUSION

In patients with recalcitrant CRS, the use of topical antibiotics trended toward improvement in symptom severity and significantly improved endoscopic appearance. Furthermore, 72% had negative posttreatment culture results, meaning microbiological "control." The results of this study support the use of high-volume culture-directed topical antibiotics, and, in the future, more rigorous prospective studies are warranted.

Topical Therapies for Refractory Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Topical therapy has become an important tool in the otolaryngologist's armamentarium for refractory chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Daily high-volume sinonasal saline irrigation and standard metered-dose topical nasal steroid therapy are supported by the most evidence. Nonstandard topical sinonasal steroid therapies are a potential option for refractory CRS. Current evidence recommends against the use of topical antifungal therapy and topical antibiotic therapy delivered using spray and nebulized techniques in routine cases of CRS. Stents are a new modality with preliminary data showing they are an option when traditional treatment has failed. Further research with long-term effects and outcomes studies for refractory CRS are needed.

The role of infection and antibiotics in chronic rhinosinusitis

OBJECTIVE

To review the current understanding of the role of infection and antibiotics in chronic rhinosinusitis.

REVIEW METHODS

PubMed literature search.

RESULTS

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in adults is an inflammatory condition and the role of infection is unclear. Biofilms are present in both CRS and normal patients so their role in CRS is unknown. Sinus cultures in CRS demonstrate a mixture of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria but may be hard to interpret due to contaminating nasal flora. Staphylococcus aureus is common in CRS patients but also present in 20-30% of nasal cultures in the normal population; eradicating this organism did not lead to symptom improvement versus placebo in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). In CRS patients who develop an episode of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS), bacteria typical of ARS can generally be cultured and require short-course treatment. For CRS, topical antibacterial or antifungal agents have shown no benefit over placebo in RCTs, although RCTs of topical antibacterial agents have been small. Oral macrolides and doxycycline, antibiotics with anti-inflammatory properties, are the only systemic antibiotics that have been evaluated in RCTs. One RCT found 3 weeks of doxycycline beneficial in patients with polyps but follow up was short (<3 months); RCTs of prolonged macrolide therapy have produced mixed results, and most show no benefit after cessation of therapy. Long-term antibiotic therapy may produce side effects and select increasingly resistant flora. The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery guidelines recommend against treatment of CRS with antifungal agents but do not comment on the role of antibacterial treatment.

CONCLUSION

The role of infection in CRS is unknown, and the only well-defined role for antibiotics is for treatment of ARS episodes or their infectious complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Evidence and evidence gaps in therapies of nasal obstruction and rhinosinusitis

Therapeutic decisions in otorhinolaryngology are based on clinical experience, surgical skills, and scientific evidence. Recently, evidence-based therapies have gained increased attention and importance due to their potential to improve the individual patient's treatment and their potential at the same time to reduce treatment costs. In clinical practice, it is almost impossible to stay ahead of the increasing mass of literature and on the other hand critically assess the presented data. A solid scientific and statistical knowledge as well as a significant amount of spare time are required to detect systematic bias and other errors in study designs, also with respect to assessing whether or not a study should be part of an individual therapeutic decision. Meta-analyses, reviews, and clinical guidelines are, therefore, of increasing importance for evidence-based therapy in clinical practice. This review is an update of the availability of external evidence for the treatment of nasal obstruction and rhinosinusitis. It becomes evident that both groups of diseases differ significantly in the availability of external evidence. Furthermore, it becomes obvious that surgical treatment options are normally based on evidence of significantly lower quality than medical treatment options.

Current trends in topical therapies for chronic rhinosinusitis: update and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) affects millions of patients worldwide. The disease is multifactorial with influences including anatomic factors, immunological disturbances, and altered sinonasal microbiome. Although oral medications are effective in controlling some symptoms, they are associated with side effects and long-term use is not ideal. Thus, topical therapies have emerged as an alternative delivery method for localized, high-concentration medication with less side effects. Areas covered: This is a review of the various topical therapies available or under investigation for the management of CRS. Common medications such as saline, steroids, and antimicrobials will be discussed. Furthermore, additives including manuka honey, xylitol, surfactant, N-chlorotaurine, Dead Sea salt, and sodium hyaluronate will be addressed. Innovations in topical therapies, such as drug-eluting biomaterials and photodynamic therapy, will also be reviewed. Expert opinion: Although topical therapies provide a high dose of active substance at the site of disease, their efficacy in CRS is not clear. Topical saline and intranasal steroids appear to consistently demonstrate therapeutic benefits. However, other topical medications require further investigation to determine long-term clinical efficacy and safety. A better understanding of their effects on the sinonasal mucociliary system is needed before they become the standard of care in CRS.

Biofilm Formation by Staphylococcus Aureus and Pseudomonas Aeruginosa is Associated with an Unfavorable Evolution after Surgery for Chronic Sinusitis and Nasal Polyposis

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether biofilm-forming capacity of bacteria demonstrated in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) has an impact on persistence of the disease following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

METHOD: Thirty-one bacterial strains recovered from 19 patients with CRS at least 1 year post-ESS. Evolution of disease was assessed by questionnaire and endoscopy as favorable or unfavorable. The bacteria were cultured on a 96-well culture plaque and a semi-quantitative method using crystal violet to quantify biofilm production was used.

RESULTS: Twenty-two of 31 samples produced a biofilm thicker or equal to the positive control. Biofilm production was noted in 6/10 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates, 8/10 Staphylococcus aureus, and 8/11 coagulase-negative staphylococci. Biofilm formation was associated with a poor evolution for Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus, but not coagulase-negative staphylococcus.

CONCLUSION: There is a correlation between in vitro biofilm-producing capacity by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus and unfavorable evolution after ESS, suggesting a role for biofilm production in chronic sinusitis.

Saline irrigation for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

This review is one of six looking at the primary medical management options for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.Chronic rhinosinusitis is common and is characterised by inflammation of the lining of the nose and paranasal sinuses leading to nasal blockage, nasal discharge, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. The condition can occur with or without nasal polyps. Nasal saline irrigation is commonly used to improve patient symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of saline irrigation in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 9); MEDLINE; EMBASE; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 30 October 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up period of at least three months comparing saline delivered to the nose by any means (douche, irrigation, drops, spray or nebuliser) with (a) placebo, (b) no treatment or (c) other pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), patient-reported disease severity and the commonest adverse event - epistaxis. Secondary outcomes included general HRQL, endoscopic nasal polyp score, computerised tomography (CT) scan score and the adverse events of local irritation and discomfort. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two RCTs (116 adult participants). One compared large-volume (150 ml) hypertonic (2%) saline irrigation with usual treatment over a six-month period; the other compared 5 ml nebulised saline twice a day with intranasal corticosteroids, treating participants for three months and evaluating them on completion of treatment and three months later. Large-volume, hypertonic nasal saline versus usual care One trial included 76 adult participants (52 intervention, 24 control) with or without polyps.Disease-specific HRQL was reported using the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI; 0 to 100, 100 = best quality of life). At the end of three months of treatment, patients in the saline group were better than those in the placebo group (mean difference (MD) 6.3 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 11.71) and at six months there was a greater effect (MD 13.5 points, 95% CI 9.63 to 17.37). We assessed the evidence to be of low quality for the three months follow-up and very low quality for the six months follow-up. Patient-reported disease severity was evaluated using a "single-item sinus symptom severity assessment" but the range of scores is not stated, making it impossible for us to determine the meaning of the data presented.No adverse effects data were collected in the control group but 23% of participants in the saline group experienced side effects including epistaxis. General HRQL was measured using SF-12 (0 to 100, 100 = best quality of life). No difference was found after three months of treatment (low quality evidence) but at six months there was a small difference favouring the saline group, which may not be of clinical significance and has high uncertainty (MD 10.5 points, 95% CI 0.66 to 20.34) (very low quality evidence). Low-volume, nebulised saline versus intranasal corticosteroids One trial included 40 adult participants with polyps. Our primary outcome of disease-specific HRQL was not reported. At the end of treatment (three months) the patients who had intranasal corticosteroids had less severe symptoms (MD -13.50, 95% CI -14.44 to -12.56); this corresponds to a large effect size. We assessed the evidence to be of very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The two studies were very different in terms of included populations, interventions and comparisons and so it is therefore difficult to draw conclusions for practice. The evidence suggests that there is no benefit of a low-volume (5 ml) nebulised saline spray over intranasal steroids. There is some benefit of daily, large-volume (150 ml) saline irrigation with a hypertonic solution when compared with placebo, but the quality of the evidence is low for three months and very low for six months of treatment.

Systemic and topical antibiotics for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

This review is one of six looking at the primary medical management options for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.Chronic rhinosinusitis is common and is characterised by inflammation of the lining of the nose and paranasal sinuses leading to nasal blockage, nasal discharge, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. The condition can occur with or without nasal polyps. Systemic and topical antibiotics are used with the aim of eliminating infection in the short term (and some to reduce inflammation in the long term), in order to normalise nasal mucus and improve symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of systemic and topical antibiotics in people with chronic rhinosinusitis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2015, Issue 8); MEDLINE; EMBASE; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 29 September 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up period of at least three months comparing systemic or topical antibiotic treatment to (a) placebo or (b) no treatment or (c) other pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), patient-reported disease severity and the commonest adverse event - gastrointestinal disturbance. Secondary outcomes included general HRQL, endoscopic nasal polyp score, computerised tomography (CT) scan score and the adverse events of suspected allergic reaction (rash or skin irritation) and anaphylaxis or other very serious reactions. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs (293 participants), all of which compared systemic antibiotics with placebo or another pharmacological intervention.The varying study characteristics made comparison difficult. Four studies recruited only adults and one only children. Three used macrolide, one tetracycline and one a cephalosporin-type antibiotic. Three recruited only patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps, one recruited patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and one had a mixed population. Three followed up patients for 10 to 12 weeks after treatment had finished. Systemic antibiotics versus placebo Three studies compared antibiotics with placebo (176 participants).One study (64 participants, without polyps) reported disease-specific HRQL using the SNOT-20 (0 to 5, 0 = best quality of life). At the end of treatment (three months) the SNOT-20 score was lower in the group receiving macrolide antibiotics than the placebo group (mean difference (MD) -0.54 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.98 to -0.10), corresponding to a moderate effect size favouring antibiotics (moderate quality evidence). Three months after treatment, it is uncertain if there was a difference between groups.One study (33 participants, with polyps) provided information on gastrointestinal disturbances and suspected allergic reaction (rash or skin irritation) after a short course of tetracycline antibiotic compared with placebo. We are very uncertain if antibiotics were associated with an increase in gastrointestinal disturbances (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 8.50) or skin irritation (RR 6.67, 95% CI 0.34 to 128.86) (very low quality evidence). Systemic antibiotics plus saline irrigation and intranasal corticosteroids versus placebo plus saline irrigation and intranasal corticosteroids One study (60 participants, some with and some without polyps) compared a three-month course of macrolide antibiotic with placebo; all participants also used saline irrigation and 70% used intranasal corticosteroids. Disease-specific HRQL was reported using SNOT-22 (0 to 110, 0 = best quality of life). Data were difficult to interpret (highly skewed and baseline imbalances) and it is unclear if there was an important difference at any time point (low quality evidence). To assess patient-reported disease severity participants rated the effect of treatment on a five-point scale (-2 for "desperately worse" to 2 for "cured") at the end of treatment (three months). For improvement in symptoms there was no difference between the antibiotics and placebo groups; the RR was 1.50 (95% CI 0.81 to 2.79; very low quality evidence), although there were also slightly more people who felt worse after treatment in the antibiotics group. There was no demonstrable difference in the rate of gastrointestinal disturbances between the groups (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.10). General HRQL was measured using the SF-36. The authors stated that there was no difference between groups at the end of treatment (12 weeks) or two weeks later. Systemic antibiotics versus intranasal corticosteroids One study (43 participants, without polyps) compared a three-month course of macrolide antibiotic with intranasal corticosteroids. Patient-reported disease severity was assessed using a composite symptom score (0 to 40; 0 = no symptoms). It is very uncertain if there was a difference as patient-reported disease severity was similar between groups (MD -0.32, 95% CI -2.11 to 1.47; low quality evidence). Systemic antibiotics versus oral corticosteroids One study (28 participants, with polyps) compared a short course of tetracycline antibiotic (unclear duration, ˜20 days) with a 20-day course of oral corticosteroids. We were unable to extract data on any of the primary efficacy outcomes. It is uncertain if there was a difference ingastrointestinal disturbances (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.14) or skin irritation (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 19.62) as the results for these outcomes were similar between groups (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very little evidence that systemic antibiotics are effective in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. We did find moderate quality evidence of a modest improvement in disease-specific quality of life in adults with chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps receiving three months of a macrolide antibiotic. The size of improvement was moderate (0.5 points on a five-point scale) and only seen at the end of the three-month treatment; by three months later no difference was found.Despite a general understanding that antibiotics can be associated with adverse effects, including gastrointestinal disturbances, the results in this review were very uncertain because the studies were small and few events were reported.No RCTs of topical antibiotics met the inclusion criteria.More research in this area, particularly evaluating longer-term outcomes and adverse effects, is required.

Phenotypes and endotypes of rhinitis and their impact on management: a PRACTALL report

Rhinitis is an umbrella term that encompasses many different subtypes, several of which still elude complete characterization. The concept of phenotyping, being the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of clinical presentation, has been well established in the last decade. Classification of rhinitis entities on the basis of phenotypes has facilitated their characterization and has helped practicing clinicians to efficiently approach rhinitis patients. Recently, the concept of endotypes, that is, the definition of disease subtypes on the basis of underlying pathophysiology, has emerged. Phenotypes/endotypes are dynamic, overlapping, and may evolve into one another, thus rendering clear-cut definitions difficult. Nevertheless, a phenotype-/endotype-based classification approach could lead toward the application of stratified and personalized medicine in the rhinitis field. In this PRACTALL document, rhinitis phenotypes and endotypes are described, and rhinitis diagnosis and management approaches focusing on those phenotypes/endotypes are presented and discussed. We emphasize the concept of control-based management, which transcends all rhinitis subtypes.

Comprehensive management of the paranasal sinuses in patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery

OBJECTIVE

The endonasal route often provides the most direct and safe approach to skull base pathology. In this article we review the literature with regard to management of the paranasal sinuses in the setting of skull base surgery.

METHODS

We describe our institutional experience and review the literature of concurrent management of the sinusitis in patients undergoing endoscopic skull base surgery.

RESULTS

Patients should be optimized preoperatively to ensure the endonasal route is a safe corridor to enter the intracranial cavity. Often the paranasal sinuses can be surgically addressed at the same time as endoscopic skull base surgery. We describe the technical details of management of the paranasal sinuses when addressing skull base pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful management of the paranasal sinuses throughout the peri-operative course is paramount to optimizing sinonasal function and safety.

The effectiveness topical amphotericin B in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis: a meta-analysis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is believed to be the result of an exaggerated reaction to fungi in the nasal mucosa, and topical amphotericin B (AMB) is a commonly used treatment. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of high-quality comparative studies to examine the efficacy of topical AMB for the treatment of CRS. A search was conducted of Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge until December 31, 2013 using combinations of the search terms chronic rhinosinusitis, human, treatment, antibiotics, nasal irrigation, nebulized, nasal lavage, sinonasal rinses, and antimicrobials. Inclusion criteria were (1) comparative studies, (2) a diagnosis of CRS or chronic sinusitis, and (3) the intervention was a topical antifungal. The primary outcome measure was quality of life (QOL), and the secondary was nasal endoscopy score. Of 235 article initially identified, five randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of four studies with complete QOL data found no difference between treatment and placebo groups [standard difference in means 0.78, 95 % confidence interval (CI) -0.25 to 1.81, P = 0.138]. Analysis of four studies with complete nasal endoscopy score data found no difference between the treatment and placebo groups (standard difference in means 0.34, 95 % CI -0.08 to 0.76, P = 0.117). AMB is not more effective than placebo in improving QOL or nasal endoscopy scores in patients with CRS.

Paranasal sinus pathogens in children with cystic fibrosis: do they relate to lower respiratory tract pathogens and is eradication successful?

BACKGROUND

The study aims were to assess the association of microflora between the paranasal sinus and the lower airways of children attending a regional paediatric cystic fibrosis centre and to determine the performance of an eradication treatment protocol for positive paranasal sinus samples.

METHOD

Paired nasal lavage and lower airway samples (cough swabs or sputum) were taken from 54 children with cystic fibrosis (median age 11 years). Positive paranasal sinus samples received eradication treatment, using oral and sinonasal nebulised antibiotics.

RESULTS

A correlation between paranasal sinus and lower airways was detected in 33/54 paired timed samples (p<0.02). Of 4/54 children who reported sinus symptoms, only 2 had paranasal sinus positive samples. 28 positive nasal lavage samples cultured 8 Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA), 8 Staphylococcus aureus (SA) and 12 other bacterial pathogens. Eradication using sinonasal nebulised antibiotics and oral antibiotics showed a success of 14/21 (67%) treated paranasal sinus positive samples at 1 month & 3 months after treatment. Success rate was 75% in the PA group and 71% in the SA group. Ongoing monitoring with nasal lavage will continue.

CONCLUSION

There was agreement between pathogens or lack of them found in the paranasal sinus and lower airways. Paranasal infection is often asymptomatic in children with cystic fibrosis. The eradication protocol for paranasal sinus pathogens had a good success rate.

Etiology, diagnosis and management of chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common health care problem, yet many aspects of this diagnosis remain poorly understood. Its etiology is often debated and remains a significant area of research. The diagnosis of CRS is based on subjective symptoms, duration of symptoms and objective evidence of inflammation. Each of these criteria must be met to make a diagnosis of CRS. Management of CRS often involves a combination of systemic and topical therapies with surgery reserved for patients who fail medical therapy. This review provides a comprehensive view of the etiology, diagnosis and management of CRS.

Chronic rhinosinusitis and emerging treatment options

This review describes the epidemiology and various treatments in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP). Evidence for short-term use of systemic corticosteroids has been shown to be favorable in CRSwNP, but still limited in CRSsNP. Topical corticosteroids improve symptom scores in both CRS subgroups. The role of microbes in CRS is still controversial. Culture-directed antibiotics are recommended for CRSsNP with exacerbation. Long-term use of low dosage antibiotics is recommended for CRSsNP for their anti-inflammatory effects. Other emerging treatment options are also discussed.

Update on the management of chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common disorder characterized by mucosal inflammation of the nose and paranasal sinuses with sinonasal symptoms persisting for greater than 12 weeks. The etiology of CRS is incompletely understood. Current understanding supports inflammation, rather than infection, as the dominant etiologic factor. CRS significantly impacts patients' quality of life and health care expenditure. There is no standard management of CRS. Treatment strategies differ based on divergent etiologies of the various CRS subclasses. Both systemic and topical agents are used. These interventions differ in CRS with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), CRS without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP) and specific situations such as allergic fungal rhinosinusitis or aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. Antibiotics are the most commonly prescribed medication for CRS, but their role in management is not strongly supported by high-level studies. This paper provides a succinct review of the evidence supporting or refuting common therapeutic agents in the management of CRS. Novel and emerging strategies will also be discussed.

Topical Drug Delivery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis is a multifactorial disorder that may be heterogeneous in presentation and clinical course. While the introduction of endoscopic sinus surgery revolutionized surgical management and has led to significantly improved patient outcomes, medical therapy remains the foundation of long-term care of chronic rhinosinusitis, particularly in surgically recalcitrant cases. A variety of devices and pharmaceutical agents have been developed to apply topical medical therapy to the sinuses, taking advantage of the access provided by endoscopic surgery. The goal of topical therapy is to address the inflammation, infection, and mucociliary dysfunction that underlies the disease. Major factors that impact success include the patient's sinus anatomy and the dynamics of the delivery device. Despite a growing number of topical treatment options, the evidence-based literature to support their use is limited. In this article, we comprehensively review current delivery methods and the available topical agents. We also discuss biotechnological advances that promise enhanced delivery in the future, and evolving pharmacotherapeutical compounds that may be added to rhinologist's armamentarium. A complete understand of topical drug delivery is increasingly essential to the management of chronic rhinosinusitis when traditional forms of medical therapy and surgery have failed.

Topical therapies in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis: an evidence-based review with recommendations

BACKGROUND

Topical therapies have become an integral component in the management plan for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Several topical therapy strategies have been evaluated, but a formal comprehensive evaluation of the evidence has never been performed. The purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based approach for the utilization of topical therapies in the management of CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed and the guidelines for development of an evidence-based review with recommendations were followed. Study inclusion criteria were: adult population >18 years old; chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) based on published diagnostic criteria; and clearly defined primary clinical end-point. We focused on reporting higher-quality studies (level 2b or higher), but reported on lower-level studies if the topic contained insufficient evidence. We excluded drug-eluting spacer and stent therapy from this review.

RESULTS

This review identified and evaluated the literature on 5 topical therapy strategies for CRS: saline irrigation, topical steroid, topical antibiotic, topical antifungal, and topical alternatives (surfactant, manuka honey, and xylitol irrigations).

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, sinonasal saline irrigation and standard topical nasal steroid therapy are recommended in the topical treatment of CRS. Nonstandard (off-label) topical sinonasal steroid therapies can be an option for managing CRS. The evidence recommends against the use of topical antifungal therapy and topical antibiotic therapy delivered using nebulized and spray techniques in routine cases of CRS. There is insufficient clinical research to provide recommendations for alternative therapies or topical antibiotic therapy delivered using other delivery methods (eg, irrigations).

Sonic aerosol therapy to target maxillary sinuses

AIM

Intranasal aerosol administration of drugs is widely used by ENT specialists. Although clinical evidence is still lacking, intranasal nebulization appears to be an interesting therapeutic option for local drug delivery, targeting anatomic sites beyond the nasal valve. The sonic nebulizer NL11SN associates a 100Hertz (Hz) sound to the aerosolization to improve deposition in the nasal/paranasal sinuses. The aim of the present study was: to evaluate in vivo the influence of associating a 100Hz sound on sinus ventilation and nasal and pulmonary aerosol deposition in normal volunteers, and; to quantify in vitro aerosol deposition in the maxillary sinuses in a plastinated head model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Scintigraphic analysis of (81m)Kr gas ventilation and of sonic aerosol ((99m)Tc-DTPA) deposition using the NL11SN was performed in vivo in seven healthy volunteers. In parallel, NL11SN gentamicin nebulization was performed, with or without associated 100Hz sound, in a plastinated human head model; the gross amount of gentamicin delivered to the paranasal sinuses was determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay.

RESULTS

Associating the 100Hz sound to (81m)Kr gas ensured paranasal sinus ventilation in healthy volunteers. (99m)Tc-DTPA particles nebulized with the NL11SN were deposited predominantly in the nasal cavities (2/3, vs 1/3 in the lungs). In vitro, the use of NL11SN in sonic mode increased gentamicin deposition threefold in the plastinated model sinuses (P<0.002); the resulting antibiotic deposit would be sufficient to induce a local therapeutic effect.

CONCLUSION

The NL11SN nebulizer ensured preferential nasal cavity aerosol deposition and successfully targeted the maxillary sinuses.

Antifungal therapy in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Because fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, contrasting articles have advocated and refuted the use of antifungal agents in its management. Although good research shows an interaction of the immune system with fungus in CRS, e.g., allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), this does not imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective in management. This study was designed to assess the potential advantage of either topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the symptomatic treatment of CRS to aid physicians in making informed decisions about treating patients with CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed with meta-analysis. All studies obtained from searches were reviewed and trials meeting the eligibility criteria were selected. CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps or American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery criteria. Authors were contacted and original data were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Five studies investigating topical antifungals and one investigating systemic antifungals met the inclusion criteria. All trials were double blinded and randomized. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo. Symptoms scores statistically favored the placebo group for this outcome. Adverse event reporting was higher in the antifungal group.

CONCLUSION

Reported side-effects of antifungal therapies may outweigh any potential benefits of treatment based on this meta-analysis and the authors therefore do not advocate the use antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.

Antimicrobials and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without polyposis in adults: an evidenced-based review with recommendations

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is characterized by inflammation of the mucosa of the nose and paranasal sinuses. The role of bacterial or fungal infection in CRS is unclear, yet antimicrobials are commonly prescribed for this condition. Published guidelines offer little direction regarding antibiotic strategies for CRS. The purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based approach to the use of antibacterial and antifungal antibiotics in the management of CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed following recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guideline Manual, Conference on Guideline Standardization (COGS), and the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation (AGREE). Inclusion criteria were: age ≥18 years old, chronic rhinosinusitis with or without polyps, antibiotic treatment as the experimental group, and clearly defined primary clinical endpoint. Studies involving patients with cystic fibrosis or acute invasive fungal sinusitis were excluded.

RESULTS

The review identified and evaluated the literature on 8 classes of antimicrobials for CRS: oral antibacterial antibiotics ≤3 weeks, oral antibacterial antibiotics >3 weeks, macrolide antibiotics, intravenous antibacterial antibiotics, topical antibacterial antibiotics, oral antifungals, intravenous antifungals, and topical antifungals.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, oral antibacterial antibiotics and prolonged macrolide antibiotics are considered therapeutic options in the treatment of CRS while the use of topical antibacterial antibiotics, intravenous antibacterial antibiotics and oral, topical, or intravenous antifungals would be recommended against. These evidence-based recommendations should not necessarily be applied to all patients with CRS and are not intended to supersede clinical judgment based on individual patient circumstances.

Novel drug-delivery systems for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis, one of the most common chronic medical complaints in the United States, seems to be increasing in incidence and prevalence, and has a significant impact on quality of life. Topical forms of medical therapy represent an attractive alternative for drug delivery to the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Topical drug delivery has the advantage of directly acting on the site of inflammation, producing a higher concentration at the target site while avoiding systemic side effects. Although considerable research has been undertaken into improving nasal formulations in order to enhance absorption, little attention has so far been directed to upgrading the delivery devices. The aim of this review is to present current knowledge on the novel drug-delivery devices in use in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis patients, and to present the current available knowledge on topical drug penetration into the sinuses using various delivery devices. Additionally, methods used to enhance fluid sinus deposition are presented and the published clinical studies on the results of nebulized antibiotics in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis patients are discussed.

State of the art treatment of nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Nasal polyposis represents the end point of multiple inflammatory pathways and controversy continues as to the exact roles of medical and surgical approaches in the management of nasal polyposis.

METHODS

A combination of both is often required to manage polyps adequately with surgery and intranasal steroids remaining the mainstay of therapy.

RESULTS

Fortunately, new technological advances are making surgery safer and more efficient. In the postoperative period, debridement is effective in reducing the formation of adhesions, and topical medications may play a beneficial role in preventing polyp reformation.

CONCLUSION

Additional investigations into the optimal perioperative medical management is needed to ensure optimal surgical outcomes.

Role of antibiotics in sinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sinusitis is a leading reason for outpatient antibiotic use, but symptoms are nonspecific. We review potential methods that might enhance the ability to appropriately prescribe antibiotics.

RECENT FINDINGS

The evidence base for antibiotic use in acute rhinosinusitis is strongest in studies with stringent entry criteria. In less restrictive studies antibiotics and placebo perform equally. Bacteria from nasopharyngeal swabs in adults correlate with sinus cultures. A recent study showed that antibiotics shortened the duration of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) symptoms in children. Tellingly, over 2000 children with symptoms were screened to enroll less than 10% who fulfilled the study's stringent criteria. In chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), two grade 1 studies on efficacy of long-term macrolide therapy showed conflicting results. Odontogenic sinusitis is underappreciated and frequently fails to grow on culture because of presumed difficulty in growing anaerobes.

SUMMARY

There is currently no grade 1 evidence to support antibiotic use in CRS; however, studies to date have not been conducted in patients with isolated purulent sinusitis. Future use of cultures to direct antibiotic therapy, such as nasopharyngeal swabs in adults with ARS or endoscopically guided cultures, may aid in targeting antibiotic therapy more effectively.