Treatment of allergic fungal sinusitis: a comparison trial of postoperative immunotherapy with specific fungal antigens

Emerging Therapies in the Medical Management of Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis

A non-invasive type of chronic sinusitis named allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS), which is a variant of allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis with nasal obstruction, was first described in 1976. The goal of this article was to provide an overview of various treatment approaches and how they can be used to control AFRS. Since this is an inflammatory disease rather than an invasive fungal infection, the treatment tries to modulate inflammation and reduce disease burden. A comprehensive treatment strategy must incorporate medicinal, surgical, biological, and immunological techniques. Owing to the chronic nature of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and its high propensity for flare-ups and recurrence, multiple procedures are frequently required. The most likely method of establishing a long-term disease control for AFRS is a comprehensive management strategy that integrates medical, surgical, and immunological care. However, there are still disagreements regarding the exact combinations. In this review, we have mentioned different modalities in the management of AFRS, such as monoclonal antibodies, probiotic Manuka honey, and aPDT among others, some of which are promising but require further research.

Heterogeneity in the definition of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control: a systematic review of the scientific literature

PURPOSE

Disease control is conceptually recognized to be an important outcome measure for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). However, inconsistent usage is a significant factor in disadoption of important concepts and it is presently unclear how consistently the construct of CRS 'control' is being defined/applied. The objective of this study was to determine the heterogeneity of CRS disease control definitions in the scientific literature.

METHODS

Systematic review of PubMed and Web of Science databases from inception through December 31, 2022. Included studies used CRS disease control as an explicitly stated outcome measure. The definitions of CRS disease control were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were identified with more than half published in 2021 or later. Definitions of CRS control were variable, although 48.4% of studies used the EPOS (2012 or 2020) criteria to define control, 14 other unique definitions of CRS disease control were also implemented. Most studies included the burden CRS symptoms (80.6%), need for antibiotics or systemic corticosteroids (77.4%) or nasal endoscopy findings (61.3%) as criteria in their definitions of CRS disease control. However, the specific combination of these criteria and prior time periods over which they were assessed were highly variable.

CONCLUSION

CRS disease control is not consistently defined in the scientific literature. Although many studies conceptually treated 'control' as the goal of CRS treatment, 15 different criteria were used to define CRS disease control, representing significant heterogeneity. Scientific derivation of criteria and collaborative consensus building are needed for the development of a widely-accepted and -applied definition of CRS disease control.

Mechanism and clinical evidence of immunotherapy in allergic rhinitis

Allergic rhinitis is a common upper airway disease caused by hypersensitivity to various aeroallergens. It causes increased inflammation throughout the body and may be complicated by other otolaryngological pathologies such as chronic hyperplastic eosinophilic sinusitis, nasal polyposis, and serous otitis media. Allergic rhinitis is an IgE-mediated disease and immunotherapy can be a possible approach for patients to limit the use of antihistamines and corticosteroids. There is evidence that allergen immunotherapy can prevent the development of new sensitizations and reduce the risk of later development of asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis. However, some patients do not benefit from this approach and the efficacy of immunotherapy in reducing the severity and relapse of symptoms is still a matter of debate. This review highlights new aspects of allergic rhinitis with a particular focus on the impact of sexual dimorphism on the disease manifestation and efficacy to the allergen specific immunotherapy.

The link between allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are common disorders affecting millions of people worldwide. Although allergic rhinitis and CRS are distinct clinical entities, certain CRS endotypes share similar pathological mechanisms as those seen in patients with allergic rhinitis. This review assesses the literature behind the similarities and differences seen in patients with CRS and allergic rhinitis, and the role atopy might play in the pathophysiology of CRS.

RECENT FINDINGS

In examining the associations between allergic rhinitis and CRS, most studies have focused primarily on CRS with nasal polyps and type 2 inflammation in CRS. Recent studies have demonstrated the similarities and differences in pathologic mechanisms behind allergic rhinitis and CRS, with an emphasis on patient endotypes, genetics, and the nasoepithelial immunologic barrier. Related immunopathology shared by allergic rhinitis and type 2 inflammation in CRS has allowed for therapeutic overlap with biologic treatments.

SUMMARY

Allergic rhinitis and CRS often present as comorbid conditions, and understanding the relationship between allergic rhinitis and CRS is important when considering treatment options. Advances in understanding the genetics and immunology, as well as biologic and immunotherapeutic treatments have improved outcomes in patients with CRS, especially in the setting of atopy.

The Role of Allergen-Specific Immunotherapy in ENT Diseases: A Systematic Review

Previous studies have demonstrated that both subcutaneous (SCIT) and sublingual specific immunotherapy (SLIT) are effective in treating allergic rhinitis (AR). Further studies have evaluated the efficacy of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) on different ear, nose, and throat (ENT) manifestations, in which allergy might have an etiopathogenetic role, such as local allergic rhinitis (LAR), rhinosinusitis (RS), otitis media (OM), and adenotonsillar (AT) disease. Nevertheless, the management of allergy in ENT diseases is still debated. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review assessing the efficacy of AIT in ENT diseases aside from AR. Literature data confirmed that AIT might be an effective therapeutic option in LAR, although its effect is restricted to studies with short-term follow-up. Furthermore, previous research demonstrated that AIT may improve symptoms and surgical outcomes of chronic rhinosinusitis when used as an adjunctive treatment. Few studies supported the hypothesis that AIT may exert positive therapeutic effects on recurrent upper airway infections as adenotonsillar disease. Finally, some clinical observations suggested that AIT may add some benefits in the management of otitis media with effusion (OME). The results of this systematic review allow us to conclude that the efficacy of AIT in ENT disorders has been only slightly investigated and additional studies are needed.

Yardstick for the medical management of chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory condition of the paranasal sinuses defined by classic symptoms, imaging findings, or endoscopic findings. There are a growing number of emerging pharmacologic therapies being evaluated to treat patients with CRS, some of which have gained indication status in the United States. There have not been updated treatment guidelines published in the United States however since 2014. This document is meant to serve as an updated expert consensus document for the pharmacologic management of patients with CRS. We review available data focusing on prospective clinical trials on oral and intranasal corticosteroids, nasal irrigation, biologics, antibiotics, and allergy immunotherapy for CRS both with and without nasal polyposis, including specific therapies for aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease-associated CRS and allergic fungal CRS. There are multiple options to treat CRS, and clinicians should be knowledgeable on the efficacy and risks of these available therapies. Allergists-immunologists now have various therapies available to treat patients with CRS.

The management of paediatric rhinosinusitis

Paediatric rhinosinusitis (PDRS) is commonly used as a synonym for rhinitis within healthcare. Although they may share common symptoms, the pathophysiology does differ; PDRS is the inflammation of the nasal mucosa in addition to the sinuses whereas rhinitis is the inflammation of just nasal mucosa. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnosis and management of PDRS. There is a greater emphasis on the diagnosis and management of PDRS within this review due to a lack of clear guidelines, which can lead to the common misconception that PDRS can be treated indifferently to rhinitis and other upper respiratory conditions. PDRS has detrimental effects on children's current health, long-term health into adulthood and education. Therefore, having a comprehensive guide of PDRS would provide a greater understanding of the condition as well as improved diagnosis and management. This article primarily focuses on the position of Europe and the United Kingdom; however, the recommendations can be applied to other countries as the causes and treatments would not differ significantly.

Optimal Management of Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis

Introduction

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is a chronic disorder with significant morbidity and a high recurrence rate needing long-term follow-up. Even after its first description many decades ago, there is still considerable uncertainty about the management of this condition.

Description

In this chapter, we breakdown the topic “Optimal management of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis” into sub-headings in order to discuss the latest research and available literature under each topic in great detail. Every attempt has been made to incorporate the highest level of evidence that was available at the time of writing.

Summary

Pre-operative diagnosis and further management prior to surgery is important. Steroids help in reducing inflammation and help improve the surgical field. Surgery remains the mainstay in the management of this condition along with long-term medical management. Oral steroids are reserved for acute flare-ups in the background of associated lung concerns. Oral and topical antifungal agents have no role in the control of the disease. Biological agents are being prescribed predominantly by respiratory physician colleagues, mainly for the control of the chest-related issues rather than for sinus disease. Immunotherapy as an adjunct with surgery is promising.

Conclusion

AFRS is a disease with many variables and a wide range of symptomatic presentation. It takes a keen clinician to identify the disease and subsequently manage the condition. Treatment involves long-term follow-up with early detection of recurrence or flare-ups. Any of the mentioned modalities of management may be employed to effectively control the condition, and treatment protocols will have to be tailor-made to suit each individual patient. Various medications and drugs such as Manuka honey, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy, hydrogen peroxide and betadine rinses appear to be promising. More robust studies need to be undertaken to ascertain their routine use in clinical practice.

Current Concepts in the Management of Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) represents a subtype of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis that exhibits a unique, often striking clinical presentation. Since its initial description more than a quarter century ago, a more sophisticated understanding of the pathophysiology of AFRS has been achieved and significant advancements in improving clinical outcomes made. This review focuses on the latest developments involving the pathophysiology and clinical management of this fascinating disease.

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is a subset of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) characterized by antifungal IgE sensitivity, eosinophil-rich mucus (ie, allergic mucin), and characteristic computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging findings in paranasal sinuses. AFRS develops in immunocompetent patients, with occurrence influenced by climate, geography, and several identified host factors. Molecular pathways and immune responses driving AFRS are still being delineated, but prominent adaptive and more recently recognized innate type 2 immune responses are important, many similar to those established in patients with other forms of CRSwNP. It is unclear whether AFRS represents merely a more extreme expression of pathways important in patients with CRSwNP or whether there are other disordered immune responses that would define a distinct endotype or endotypes. Although AFRS and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis share some analogous immune mechanisms, the 2 conditions do not occur commonly in the same patient. Treatment of AFRS almost always requires surgical debridement of the involved sinuses. Oral corticosteroids decrease recurrence after surgery, but other adjunctive pharmacologic agents, including topical and oral antifungal agents, do not have a firm evidence basis for use. There is good rationale for use of biologic agents that target eosinophilic inflammation or other type 2 responses, but studies in patients with AFRS are required.

Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Does Allergy Play a Role?

A few chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) variants have demonstrated a strong association with environmental allergy, including allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) and central compartment atopic disease (CCAD). However, the overall relationship between CRS and allergy remains poorly defined. The goal of this review is to evaluate the relationship between CRS and allergy with a focus on specific CRS variants.

The relationship between allergy and chronic rhinosinusitis

Objective

To summarize the current evidence regarding a relationship between chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) and allergy.

Methods

Literature review.

Results

Despite frequent assumption of an association between CRS and allergy the relationship between these entities remains poorly defined. Certain CRS entities, however, have demonstrated a strong association with allergy—namely allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and central compartment atopic disease.

Conclusion

Studies are heterogeneous and largely retrospective in design with inconclusive evidence for an association between CRS and allergy. Knowledge of CRS endotypes is important in order to understand which entities may or may not be associated with allergy.

Level of Evidence: 5

Effect of Using Multiple Culture Media for the Diagnosis of Noninvasive Fungal Sinusitis

Background

This study was designed to assess the relative efficiency of three different culture media for isolating fungi in patients suspected of having noninvasive fungal sinusitis.

Methods

A prospective study was performed of 209 operative samples of sinus “fungal-like” mucin from 134 patients on 171 occasions and processed for microscopy and fungal culture in Sabouraud's dextrose agar, potato dextrose agar, and broth media.

Results

Ninety-three (69%) of 134 patients had evidence of fungal infection. Two-thirds of patients had negative microscopy samples yet 56% of these went on to positive cultures. Forty-five percent cultured Aspergillus genus. Discrepancy between the fungi cultured in different media and on different occasions was common. With a single culture medium up to 19% of patients and 15% of samples would have been falsely labeled fungal negative.

Conclusion

Increasing the number and type of fungal culture media used increases the number and range of fungal isolates from mucin in patients with the features of fungal sinusitis. Negative specimen microscopy is unreliable. All specimens should be cultured in multiple media and on multiple occasions when fungal sinusitis is suspected.

Prevalence of Noninvasive Fungal Sinusitis in South Australia

Background

The aim of this study was to document the prevalence of noninvasive fungal sinusitis in patients with chronic sinusitis and thick viscous secretions in South Australia.

Methods

We studied of 349 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery in a specialized rhinology practice. Patients with nasal polyposis and thick fungal-like sinus mucin had operative samples sent for microscopy and fungal culture. Evidence of atopy was taken as positive radioallergosorbent or skin-prick tests to fungi.

Results

One hundred and thirty-four (38%) patients were noted to have thick, viscid sinus mucin, raising suspicion of fungal disease. Ninety-three patients had positive fungal cultures or microscopy (26.6%). It was possible to classify 95.5% of the patients into subgroups of noninvasive fungal sinusitis or nonfungal sinusitis: 8.6% of patients with allergic fungal sinusitis, 1.7% of patients with allergic fungal sinusitis–like sinusitis, 15.2% of patients with chronic fungal sinusitis, one patient with a fungal ball, and the remaining 69% of patients with nonfungal chronic sinusitis.

Conclusion

This is the first prospective study to evaluate the prevalence of these increasingly widely recognized conditions. It highlights the need for otolaryngologists to be alert to these not uncommon diagnoses in order for early, appropriate medical and surgical management to be instituted.

Allergic Aspergillus Rhinosinusitis

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is a unique variety of chronic polypoid rhinosinusitis usually in atopic individuals, characterized by presence of eosinophilic mucin and fungal hyphae in paranasal sinuses without invasion into surrounding mucosa. It has emerged as an important disease involving a large population across the world with geographic variation in incidence and epidemiology. The disease is surrounded by controversies regarding its definition and etiopathogenesis. A working group on "Fungal Sinusitis" under the International Society for Human and Animal Mycology (ISHAM) addressed some of those issues, but many questions remain unanswered. The descriptions of "eosinophilic fungal rhinosinusitis" (EFRS), "eosinophilic mucin rhinosinusitis" (EMRS) and mucosal invasion by hyphae in few patients have increased the problem to delineate the disease. Various hypotheses exist for etiopathogenesis of AFRS with considerable overlap, though recent extensive studies have made certain in depth understanding. The diagnosis of AFRS is a multi-disciplinary approach including the imaging, histopathology, mycology and immunological investigations. Though there is no uniform management protocol for AFRS, surgical clearing of the sinuses with steroid therapy are commonly practiced. The role of antifungal agents, leukotriene antagonists and immunomodulators is still questionable. The present review covers the controversies, recent advances in pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of AFRS.

Are allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis lifelong conditions?

Aspergillus fumigatus can cause several allergic disorders including Aspergillus-sensitized asthma, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA), and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS). ABPA is an immunological pulmonary disorder caused by allergic reactions mounted against antigens of A. fumigatus colonizing the airways of patients with asthma (and cystic fibrosis). Allergic bronchopulmonary mycosis is an allergic fungal airway disease caused by thermotolerant fungi other than A. fumigatus On the other hand, AFRS is a type of chronic rhinosinusitis that is also a result of hypersensitivity reactions to the presence of fungi that become resident in the sinuses. The pathogenesis of ABPA and AFRS share several common features, and in fact, AFRS can be considered as the upper airway counterpart of ABPA. Despite sharing similar immunopathogenetic features, the simultaneous occurrence of the two disorders is uncommon. Due to the lacuna in understanding of the causative mechanisms, and deficiencies in the diagnosis and treatment, these disorders unfortunately are lifelong illnesses. This review provides an overview of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and long-term outcomes of both these disorders.

WITHDRAWN: Topical steroid for chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps

Review withdrawn from Issue 4, 2016. Replaced by new reviews 'Intranasal steroids versus placebo or no intervention for chronic rhinosinusitis' (Chong 2016a) and 'Different types of intranasal steroids for chronic rhinosinusitis' (Chong 2016b).

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

The spectrum of allergic fungal diseases of the upper and lower airways

Fungi cause a wide spectrum of fungal diseases of the upper and lower airways. There are three main phyla involved in allergic fungal disease: (1) Ascomycota (2) Basidiomycota (3) Zygomycota. Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) causes chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms and is caused predominantly by Aspergillus fumigatus in India and Bipolaris in the United States. The recommended treatment approach for AFRS is surgical intervention and systemic steroids. Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (APBA) is most commonly diagnosed in patients with asthma or cystic fibrosis. Long term systemic steroids are the mainstay treatment option for ABPA with the addition of an antifungal medication. Fungal sensitization or exposure increases a patient's risk of developing severe asthma and has been termed severe asthma associated with fungal sensitivity (SAFS). Investigating for triggers and causes of a patient's asthma should be sought to decrease worsening progression of the disease.

Sublingual Immunotherapy for Allergic Fungal Sinusitis

Allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS) is a condition that has an allergic basis caused by exposure to fungi in the sinonasal tract leading to chronic inflammation. Despite standard treatment modalities, which typically include surgery and medical management of allergies, patients still have a high rate of recurrence. Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been used as adjuvant treatment for AFS. Evidence exists to support the use of sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) as a safe and efficacious method of treating allergies, but no studies have assessed the utility of SLIT in the management of allergic fungal sinusitis. A record review of cases of AFS that are currently or previously treated with sublingual immunotherapy from 2007 to 2011 was performed. Parameters of interest included serum IgE levels, changes in symptoms, Lund-McKay scores, decreased sensitization to fungal allergens associated with AFS, and serum IgE levels. Ten patients with diagnosed AFS were treated with SLIT. No adverse effects related to the use of SLIT therapy were identified. Decreases in subjective complaints, exam findings, Lund-McKay scores, and serum IgE levels were observed. Thus, sublingual immunotherapy appears to be a safe adjunct to the management of AFS that may improve patient outcomes.

Systematic review of immunotherapy for chronic rhinosinusitis

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy (IT) has been well established as an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR), but little is known about the benefits of IT on clinical outcomes of comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The goal of this publication is to systematically review the literature regarding outcomes of IT in patients with atopic CRS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted including studies that assessed the efficacy of IT on clinical outcome measures in CRS including without polyp, with polyp, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis subgroups. Excluded articles were those only reporting outcomes specific to asthma or AR.

RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review, none of which were randomized controlled trials. Generally, symptom scores improved in patients treated with IT when compared with baseline data and control patients. Objective endoscopic exam measures improved with IT treatment in short-term studies. Significant improvements were observed in radiographic assessments, and there was a decreased necessity for revision surgery, interventional office visits, and intranasal and oral steroid use.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions are limited by the paucity of available data on the efficacy of IT for treating CRS-specific outcome measures. There is weak evidence to support the use of IT as an adjunctive treatment in CRS patients, particularly in the postoperative period.

Allergen Immunotherapy in an HIV+ Patient with Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis

Patients with HIV/AIDS can present with multiple types of fungal rhinosinusitis, fungal balls, granulomatous invasive fungal rhinosinusitis, acute or chronic invasive fungal rhinosinusitis, or allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS). Given the variable spectrum of immune status and susceptibility to severe infection from opportunistic pathogens it is extremely important that clinicians distinguish aggressive fungal invasive fungal disease from the much milder forms such as AFRS. Here we describe a patient with HIV and AFRS to both remind providers of the importance of ruling out invasive fungal disease and outline the other unique features of fungal sinusitis treatment in the HIV-positive population. Additionally we discuss the evidence for and against use of allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for fungal disease in general, as well as the evidence for AIT in the HIV population.

Evidence-based treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

BACKGROUND

Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNPs) is the most challenging form of CRS to treat. Clinical practices vary widely among physicians around the world, often with little evidence to support current therapies.

METHODS

This study evaluates various medical and surgical treatments with a focus on the highest levels of evidence. Recommendations for various therapies are provided based on consensus panels and evidence-based reviews.

RESULTS

Therapies with the strongest evidence and recommendations for CRSwNPs include oral steroids and topical nasal steroid sprays. There is also reasonable evidence for surgery, to include perioperative oral steroids and postoperative oral antibiotics for at least 2 weeks. There is little evidence to support other therapies, including commonly used modalities such as oral antibiotics, antihistamines, and immunotherapy.

CONCLUSION

CRSwNPs is a heterogenous disorder that currently has very few therapies supported by strong evidence. It is likely that in the near future, a more refined understanding of CRSwNPs will permit clinicians to tailor therapies using high-level evidence with improved outcomes.

Medical management of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis following endoscopic sinus surgery: an evidence-based review and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is a subset of polypoid chronic rhinosinusitis that is characterized by the presence of eosinophilic mucin with fungal hyphae within the sinuses and a Type I hypersensitivity to fungi. The treatment of AFRS usually involves surgery in combination with medical therapies to keep the disease in a dormant state. However, what constitutes an optimal medical regimen is still controversial. Hence, the purpose of this article is to provide an evidence-based approach for the medical management of AFRS.

METHODS

A systemic review of the literature on the medical management of AFRS was performed using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Review Databases up to March 15, 2013. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients >18 years old; AFRS as defined by Bent and Kuhn; post-sinus surgery; studies with a clearly defined end point to evaluate the effectiveness of medical therapy in postoperative AFRS patients.

RESULTS

This review identified and assessed 6 medical modalities for AFRS in the literature: oral steroids; topical steroids; oral antifungals; topical antifungals; immunotherapy; and leukotriene modulators.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence in the literature, postoperative systemic and standard topical nasal steroids are recommended in the medical management of AFRS. Nonstandard topical nasal steroids, oral antifungals, and immunotherapy are options in cases of refractory AFRS. No recommendations can be provided for topical antifungals and leukotriene modulators due to insufficient clinical research reported in the literature.

Fungal rhinosinusitis: what every allergist should know

The interaction between fungi and the sinonasal tract results in a diverse range of diseases with an equally broad spectrum of clinical severity. The classification of these interactions has become complex, and this review seeks to rationalize and simplify the approach to fungal diseases of the nose and paranasal sinuses. These conditions may be discussed under two major headings: non-invasive disease (localized fungal colonization, fungal ball and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis) and invasive disease (acute invasive rhinosinusitis, chronic invasive rhinosinusitis and granulomatous invasive rhinosinusitis). A diagnosis of fungal rhinosinusitis is established by combining findings on history, clinical examination, laboratory testing, imaging and histopathology. The immunocompetence of the patient is of great importance, as invasive fungal rhinosinusitis is uncommon in immunocompetent patients. With the exception of localized fungal colonization, treatment of all forms of fungal rhinosinusitis relies heavily on surgery. Systemic antifungal agents are a fundamental component in the treatment of invasive forms, but are not indicated for the treatment of the non-invasive forms. Antifungal drugs may have a role as adjuvant therapy in allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, but evidence is poor to support recommendations. Randomized controlled trials need to be performed to confirm the benefit of immunotherapy in the treatment of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. In this article, we will summarize the current literature, addressing the controversies regarding the diagnosis and management of fungal rhinosinusitis, and focussing on those aspects which are important for clinical immunologists and allergists.

Immunotherapy in allergic fungal sinusitis: The controversy continues. A recent review of literature

Allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), also referred to as allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS), is a noninvasive, eosinophilic form of recurrent chronic allergic hypertrophic rhinosinusitis. AFS has distinct clinical, histopathological, and prognostic findings that differentiate it from other forms of sinusitis. The core pathogenesis and optimum treatment strategies remain debated. Concerns surround the use of immunotherapy for AFS because allergen-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) induced by immunotherapy could theoretically incite a Gell and Coombs type III (complex mediated) reaction. Type I hypersensitivity is established by high serum levels of allergen-specific IgE to various fungal antigens and positive Bipolaris skin test results. Type III hypersensitivity is established by an IgG-mediated process defined by the presence of allergen-specific IgG that forms complexes with fungal antigen inducing an immunologic inflammatory response. These reveal the multiple immunologic pathways through which AFS can impact host responses. Recent literature establishing benefits of fungal immunotherapy and no evidence of type III–mediated reactions, severe local reactions, or delayed reactions, indicate that application of AFS desensitization is a reasonable therapeutic strategy for this difficult to manage entity. Our review should encourage further clinical acceptance of AFS desensitization because the existing literature on this subject shows benefits of fungal immunotherapy and no evidence of type III–mediated reactions, severe local reactions, or delayed reactions.

The role of fungi in diseases of the nose and sinuses

BACKGROUND

Human exposure to fungal elements is inevitable, with normal respiration routinely depositing fungal hyphae within the nose and paranasal sinuses. Fungal species can cause sinonasal disease, with clinical outcomes ranging from mild symptoms to intracranial invasion and death. There has been much debate regarding the precise role fungal species play in sinonasal disease and optimal treatment strategies.

METHODS

A literature review of fungal diseases of the nose and sinuses was conducted.

RESULTS

Presentation, diagnosis, and current management strategies of each recognized form of fungal rhinosinusitis was reviewed.

CONCLUSION

Each form of fungal rhinosinusitis has a characteristic presentation and clinical course, with the immune status of the host playing a critical pathophysiological role. Accurate diagnosis and targeted treatment strategies are necessary to achieve optimal outcomes.

Fungal disease of the nose and sinuses: an updated overview

Fungal diseases of the nose and sinuses encompasses a diverse spectrum of disease. Clinical manifestations are largely dependent upon the immune status of the host, as, given the ubiquitous nature of these organisms, exposure is unavoidable. Asymptomatic colonization of the nasal passages by fungi warrants no treatment and is common, while allergic fungal rhinosinusitis is challenging and often requires a combined approach of surgical intervention, immunotherapy, and corticosteroid administration. A diagnosis requires a combination of IgE immune reactivity, eosinophilic infiltration, and fungi recovery. Similarly, invasive disease may present only after several months of slowly progressive disease, or in rapid and fulminant fashion in the appropriate host. A differentiation of these overlapping syndromes and the pathophysiologic processes at play, and recommended treatment algorithms, are the focus of this review.

Immunotherapy for allergic fungal sinusitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS) results from an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated, eosinophil-predominant hypersensitivity reaction to extramucosal fungi within the paranasal sinuses. Although the pathogenesis of this noninvasive process is still not fully understood, there is new information. Recently, the use of allergen immunotherapy with fungal antigens as an adjunct in treatment of AFS has been evaluated. In this review, we summarize the experience in the published literature on the topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is evidence to suggest that allergen immunotherapy to fungal allergens may be effective in the treatment of symptoms of AFS and may decrease the rate of postoperative exacerbations and further operations. There is no evidence that this therapy induces immune complex disease. These studies pave the way for controlled trials of immunotherapy in patients with AFS.

SUMMARY

Allergen immunotherapy to fungi shows promise as a treatment to decrease the recurrence of AFS and should be considered a part of the treatment regimen. However, because the number of patients treated has been small and one study suggested that fungal immunotherapy administered before removal of fungal contents from the sinuses could worsen sinusitis, controlled studies are essential to moving forward.

Allergic fungal sinusitis in children

Allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS) is a subtype of eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) characterized by type I hypersensitivity, nasal polyposis, characteristic computed tomography scan findings, eosinophilic mucus, and the presence of fungus on surgical specimens without evidence of tissue invasion. This refractory subtype of CRS is of the great interest in the pediatric population, given the relatively early age of onset and the difficulty in managing AFS through commercially available medical regimens. Almost universally, a diagnosis of AFS requires operative intervention. Postoperative adjuvant medical therapy is a mainstay in the treatment paradigm of pediatric AFS.

Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) has always remained a topic of discussion at all rhinology meets. Despite so much of literature available, the nature of this disease, its diagnosis, pathogenesis, classification and appropriate management continue to generate debate and controversy even after three decades of research and investigation. AFRS is an endemic disease in North and South India. In spite of this, there has been no optimal management protocol for this disease being followed in India yet. To overcome this, a national panel was conducted on AFRS at the ENT Surgical Update 2011, held at Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh with experts from all over the country so that a consensus can be achieved regarding the workup and management of AFRS.

How to cite this article

Gupta AK, Shah N, Kameswaran M, Rai D, Janakiram TN, Chopra H, Nayar R, Soni A, Mohindroo NK, Rao CMS, Bansal S, Meghnadh KR, Vaid N, Patel HM, Sood S, Kanojia S, Charaya K, Pandhi SC, Mann SBS. Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis. Clin Rhinol An Int J 2012;5(2): 72-86.

Topical steroid for chronic rhinosinusitis without polyps

BACKGROUND

Topical corticosteroid is used as part of a comprehensive medical treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) without polyps. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence to show a clear overall benefit. Trials studying the efficacy of topical corticosteroid use various delivery methods in patients who have or have not had sinus surgery, which directly impacts on topical delivery and distribution.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of topical steroid in patients with CRS without nasal polyps and perform a meta-analysis of symptom improvement data, including subgroup analysis by sinus surgery status and topical delivery methods.

SEARCH STRATEGY

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; ISRCTN and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 9 July 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials in which a topically administered corticosteroid was compared with either a placebo, no treatment or alternative topically administered corticosteroid for the treatment of CRS without polyps in patients of any age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors reviewed the search results and selected trials meeting the eligibility criteria, obtaining full texts and contacting authors where necessary. We documented our justification for the exclusion of studies. Two authors extracted data using a pre-determined standardised data form.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (590 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The trials were of low (six trials) and medium (four trials) risk of bias. The primary outcome was sino-nasal symptoms. When compared to placebo, topical steroid improved symptom scores (standardised mean difference -0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.60 to -0.13, P = 0.002; five trials, n = 286) and had a greater proportion of responders (risk ratio 1.69; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.37, P = 0.002; four trials, n = 263). With a limited number of studies, the subgroup analyses of patients who had received sinus surgery versus those who had not was not significant (P = 0.35). Subgroup analyses by topical delivery method revealed more benefit when steroid was administered directly to the sinuses than with simple nasal delivery (P = 0.04). There were no differences between groups for quality of life and adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical steroid is a beneficial treatment for CRS without polyps and the adverse effects are minor. It may be included in a comprehensive treatment of CRS without polyps. Direct delivery of steroid to the sinuses may bring more beneficial effect. Further studies comparing different topical drug delivery methods to the sinuses, with appropriate treatment duration (longer than 12 weeks), are required.

Genetics and phenotyping in chronic sinusitis

Chronic sinusitis with nasal polyposis historically has been treated as a single monolithic clinical disorder. Just as asthma is now accepted as numerous heterogeneous diseases, chronic sinusitis should also be viewed as comprising several diseases with varying causes, with each one characterized by distinct histologic and gene and protein expression patterns. This includes recognition of the need to define these diseases based on the presence or absence of an eosinophilic infiltrate but also on additional distinctions based on unique agents that drive their development and perpetuation. As a collection of heterogeneous diseases, proper differential diagnosis is required to delineate appropriate therapeutic intervention. This review will focus on recognized distinct presentations of chronic sinus disease, including distinguishing the clinical presentations, cellular and molecular characteristics, genetic differences, and current treatment options for each.

Fungal immunotherapy in patients with allergic fungal sinusitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic fungal sinusitis is a disease for which optimal treatment is unclear. Previous studies using fungal immunotherapy reported less recurrence after surgery. There has been concern that traditional high-dose immunotherapy could induce systemic hypersensitivity in patients with this condition.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety of high-dose subcutaneous fungal immunotherapy in patients with allergic fungal sinusitis.

METHODS

Safety of high-dose subcutaneous fungal immunotherapy was assessed in 14 patients from our clinic who met diagnostic criteria for allergic fungal sinusitis. Results were compared to a control group of 14 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without allergic fungal sinusitis who received subcutaneous fungal immunotherapy. We also performed a literature search to identify all previous reports of subcutaneous fungal immunotherapy.

RESULTS

No differences between numbers of immediate local or large local reactions, delayed local reactions, or required dose adjustments were noted between patient and control groups. One patient from each group experienced a mild systemic urticarial reaction to immunotherapy. Similarly, there were no differences in complications in either group that also received immunotherapy with nonfungal allergens. No patient developed evidence of immune complex disease. Eight publications were identified for inclusion in our literature analysis, 7 of which used low-dose subcutaneous immunotherapy. None of these noted complications more serious than local reactions.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate that subcutaneous fungal immunotherapy in patients with allergic fungal sinusitis is unlikely to cause adverse reactions other than those occurring with pollen immunotherapy. Clinical trials of high-dose, traditional immunotherapy with fungal allergens for efficacy may proceed in patients with allergic fungal sinusitis without undue concern.

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis is a phenotype of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, characterized by type 1 hypersensitivity to fungi, eosinophilic mucin with fungal hyphae in sinus secretions, and propensity for mucocele formation and bone erosion. Although its differentiation from other forms of chronic polypoid rhinosinusitis with eosinophilic mucin is sometimes problematic, type 1 hypersensitivity is a component of the disease process. Medical and surgical management can be augmented by immunotherapy directed toward the patient's specific allergen sensitivities. The primary rationale for immunotherapy is to control the allergic diathesis that may be contributing to the patient's chronic sinus inflammation.

Localized immunoglobulin E expression in allergic rhinitis and nasal polyposis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews recent literature on local tissue identification of immunoglobulin E (IgE) in various sinonasal inflammatory conditions. Discussions of local IgE expression in allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, atopic and nonatopic sinonasal polyposis, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis are included.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increased levels of IgE and positive reactivity on nasal allergen provocation tests have been demonstrated in nasal lavage fluid of patients with negative systemic allergy testing. In addition, elevated levels of Alternaria alternata-specific IgE have been identified in nasal polyp patients; this is hypothesized as a contributory factor in the development of nasal polyposis. Further evidence supports the role of local IgE to Staphylococcus aureus superantigens in atopic and nonatopic nasal polyposis. Finally, local IgE specific for a range of antigens has been identified in sinus and inferior turbinate tissue in patients with allergic fungal rhinosinusitis.

SUMMARY

Increased levels of IgE have been identified in sinonasal tissues in allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, atopic and nonatopic sinonasal polyposis, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. The ability to identify local tissue IgE in inflammatory sinonasal disease states may have significant diagnostic and therapeutic implications.

Local production of antigen-specific IgE in different anatomic subsites of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis patients

Objective: Local production of antigen-specific IgE in allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS) is likely integral to the expression of allergy. This study examines if there are anatomic variations in local IgE expression or if variations among fungal and nonfungal IgE exist.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Tertiary medical center.

Subjects and Methods: Specimens from 11 AFRS, 8 chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyps (CRSsNP), and 9 control patients underwent immunohistochemical localization for IgE and evaluation for antigen-specific IgE by ImmunoCAP testing.

Results: Inferior turbinate (IT) epithelium had greater IgE staining in AFRS than control ( P = 0.013) and CRSsNP ( P = 0.002). A significant difference was also found at the IT subepithelial level for AFRS compared with controls ( P = 0.001) and CRSsNP ( P < 0.001). Within AFRS, IgE staining was increased in the subepithelium compared to epithelium ( P = 0.003). ImmunoCAP analysis on IT tissue from AFRS and controls demonstrated increased antigen-specific IgE for 5 of 14 antigens ( P < 0.05) and total IgE ( P < 0.001). There were no significant anatomic differences between IT and sinus IgE staining.

Conclusion: More fungal and nonfungal IgE is expressed in IT and sinus tissues of AFRS patients, as compared with control and CRSsNP patients.

Antigen-specific IgE in Sinus Mucosa of Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis Patients

Background

Local tissue production of antigen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) has been shown in patients with allergic rhinitis and in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) with nasal polyps. In allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS), specific IgE has been established in nasal lavage fluid and eosinophilic mucin. In this study, local production of antigen-specific IgE within sinus mucosa of AFRS patients was evaluated.

Methods

Sinus mucosa homogenates from 11 AFRS patients, 8 patients with CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP), and 9 nonrhinosinusitis control patients were assessed for IgE localization by immunohistochemistry. AFRS and control tissue homogenates were also evaluated for antigen-specific IgE to 14 common antigens by ImmunoCAP testing (Phadia AB, Portage, MI).

Results

There was a significant increase in IgE staining in AFRS sinus epithelium and subepithelium compared with controls and with patients with CRSsNP (p ≤ 0.012 for all group differences). AFRS patients showed increased IgE staining in the subepithelium when compared with epithelium (p < 0.001). AFRS sinus tissue had significantly more IgE measured by ImmunoCAP when compared with control sinus tissue for 7 of 14 specific antigens (p < 0.05) and for total IgE (p = 0.004). Antigens with a significant difference on ImmunoCAP included Cladosporium, Aspergillus, Timothy grass, red maple, cockroach, ragweed, and cocklebur.

Conclusion

AFRS patients showed significantly more IgE in sinus mucosa tissue specimens, with increased IgE in subepithelial sites when compared with epithelium. The increased expression of antigen-specific IgE is not limited to fungal antigens. These findings support the role of type I hypersensitivity and local manifestations of allergy in AFRS patients.

Allergic fungal rhinosinusitis: diagnosis and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The proper diagnosis and treatment of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis remain controversial. We discuss recent additions to the literature regarding diagnosis and treatment of this condition.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is considerable overlap in the clinical features of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and other forms of eosinophilic mucin chronic rhinosinusitis. Type 1 hypersensitivity and characteristic computed tomographic findings may have predictive value for a final diagnosis of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis, patients with which are more likely to have bony erosion than patients with other forms of chronic rhinosinusitis. The decreases in orbital volume associated with expansive allergic fungal rhinosinusitis disease may spontaneously improve after successful treatment. Most patients have detectable fungal-specific IgE in their so-called allergic mucin. Elevated levels of fungal-specific IgG3 are a consistent finding in patients with allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and eosinophilic mucin chronic rhinosinusitis. Antifungal treatment is still considered a treatment option, but further study is needed.

SUMMARY

Type 1 hypersensitivity to fungal antigens helps to distinguish allergic fungal rhinosinusitis from other forms of eosinophilic mucin chronic rhinosinusitis. Bony erosion and orbital expansion giving rise to proptosis are prominent features of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis. Advances in medical treatment will require prospective and controlled trials.

Allergic fungal sinusitis- A clinico-pathological study

The co-existence of fungal elements in allergic nasal Polyposis, has given rise to a distinct clinical entity known as 'Allergic fungal sinusitis ' (AF'S). Many a time, these fungal elements may not be diagnosed pre-operatively by routine diagnostic nasal endoscopy or CT scan of paranasal sinuses, due to the florid presentation of nasal polyps, which usually obscure the underlying fungal pathology. The diagnosis is often made intra-operatively. The post-operative confirmation of AFS is by histopathology, fungal smear, fungal culture, allergic murin study and fungal specific IgE titres. We report a series often such cases done in our institution, which highlight that AFS should be considered as a differential diagnosis in Sinonasal Polyposis cases, for their effective management.