Effect of Medical Therapy in Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS), oral antihistamines (POAH), and allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) are widely used in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR); however, appraisal of treatment effect has been heterogenous, and few studies have interpreted these outcomes in context with measures of nasal airflow.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials for common therapy classes for AR to assess standardized treatment effect on validated patient-reported outcomes and physiologic measures of airflow.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, OVID, and Cochrane library databases to identify randomized controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria. Treatment effects of INCS, POAH, and ASIT on total nasal symptom score (TNSS), visual analog scale (VAS), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), and peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) were analyzed by meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies with 4673 AR patients were identified, with 5 INCS, 8 POAH, and 9 ASIT trials. INCS improved TNSS (mean difference [MD] 0.90; P = .002) and PNIF (MD 13.31 L/min [P = .0007]. POAH improved quality of life assessed by RQLQ [MD 0.36; P < .001], but no improvement was found in PNIF. ASIT improved RQLQ [MD 0.65; P < .001], with a trend toward improvement in TNSS.

CONCLUSION

Overall, INCS resulted in a clinically and statistically meaningful improvement in symptom scores and physiologic measures in AR. POAH and ASIT both improved symptom scores and quality of life, but their impacts upon nasal airflow are uncertain. There is a lack of studies assessing the effect of INCS on quality of life and the effect of POAH on symptom severity, particularly for mild AR. Future studies should assess the effect of treatment for each of these patient-reported measures.

Systematic review of measures of disease severity in rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Rhinologists often encounter a broad spectrum of allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) patients, who can be variably classified based upon timing and severity of disease. Our understanding of the varied quality of life (QOL) impact in different classifications of rhinitis is limited. Thus a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of rhinitis upon our patients, as measured by both patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinical physiologic measures, as well as unique factors associated with disease severity is needed.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases was performed to identify AR and NAR studies reporting Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ), total nasal symptom score (TNSS), or visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and physiologic measures including peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and nasal airflow. Relationships between PROMs, physiologic measures, and associated factors (e.g., allergic status, disease duration) were assessed by weighted correlations and meta-regressions.

RESULTS

A total of 171 studies reporting on 33,843 patients were included. Symptoms were more severe in AR than NAR on VAS (p < 0.001). Classification based upon Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) guidelines demonstrated differences in PROM severity. There was no significant correlation between PROMs and demographic factors, comorbidities, or physiologic measures. Meta-regression identified a correlation between worse RQLQ scores and shorter disease duration (r = -0.4, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Rhinitic patients have more severe impact upon QOL in the presence of allergy with variable impact upon specific symptom subdomains. PROMs do not correlate with common demographic factors, comorbidities, or physiologic measures of nasal airflow.

The Nasal Obstruction Balance Index: A Novel Approach to Improving Correlation Between Unilateral Nasal Airway Measurements and Evaluating Nasal Airway Asymmetry

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Demonstrate that the Nasal Obstruction Balance Index (NOBI) model fulfils the unmet need of improving unilateral correlation between subjective and objective nasal obstruction outcome measures and identifying the more obstructed side. Improve correlation between unilateral objective nasal airway measurements (nasal inspiratory peak flow [NIPF] and acoustic rhinometry [AR]) and subjective Visual Analogue Scale for nasal obstruction (VAS-NO) scores. Improve assessment of nasal airway asymmetry by evaluating unilateral measurements both before and after the application of nasal decongestant; which the patient could better understand. NOBI represents a ratio calculated by taking the difference between left and right nasal airway measurements and divided by the maximum unilateral measurement. It is based on Poiseuille's law and aims to reduce the confounding variables which challenge nasal airway measurement.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Forty-three controls and 34 patients with nasal obstruction underwent both unilateral and bilateral NIPF, AR and VAS-NO measurements; these were repeated after the application of nasal decongestant. The NOBI values for unilateral NIPF, AR, and VAS-NO were calculated both before and after decongestant.

RESULTS

The correlation between unilateral NIPF and AR measurements was enhanced considerably (r = 0.57, P < .01) when NOBI was applied. The NOBI metric significantly increased the correlation between unilateral NIPF, AR, and VAS-NO scores. Postdecongestant NOBI for NIPF and AR measurements correctly identified the more obstructed side in 82.4% and 94.1% of the deviated nasal septum (DNS) cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The NOBI model provides a better correlation between unilateral subjective and objective measurements and identifies the more obstructed side.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective cohort study (level III) Laryngoscope, 2021.

Diagnosing nasal obstruction and its common causes using the nasal acoustic device: A pilot study

Objectives

There is a need to develop a medical device which can accurately measure normal and abnormal nasal breathing which the patient can better understand in addition to being able to diagnose the cause for their nasal obstruction.

The aim is to evaluate the accuracy of the nasal acoustic device (NAD) in diagnosing the common causes for nasal obstruction and diagnosing normal and abnormal (nasal obstruction) nasal breathing.

Methods

This pilot study recruited 27 patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), and a deviated nasal septum (DNS) which represents the common causes for NO and 26 controls (with normal nasal breathing). Nasal breathing sounds were recorded by the NAD akin to two small stethoscopes placed over the left and right nasal ala. The novel outcome metrics for the NAD include inspiratory nasal acoustic score (INA) score, expiratory nasal acoustic (ENA) score and the inspiratory nasal obstruction balance index (NOBI). The change in acoustic score following decongestant is key in this diagnostic process.

Results

Pre‐decongestant ENA score was used to detect the presence of nasal obstruction in patients compared to controls, with a sensitivity of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.66‐0.96) and a specificity of 0.77 (0.54‐1.00). Post‐decongestant percentage change in INA score was used to identify the presence of AR or CRS, with a sensitivity of 0.87 (0.69‐1.00) and specificity of 0.72 (0.55‐0.89) for AR; and a sensitivity of 0.92 (0.75‐1.00) and specificity of 0.69 (0.52‐0.86) for CRS. Post‐decongestant inspiratory NOBI was used to identify DNS, with a sensitivity of 0.77 (0.59‐0.95) and specificity of 0.94 (0.82‐1.00).

Conclusion

We have demonstrated that the NAD can help distinguish between normal and abnormal nasal breathing and help diagnose AR, CRS, and DNS. Such a device has not been invented and could revolutionize COVID‐19 recovery telemedicine.

Level of Evidence

Diagnostic accuracy study—Level III.

Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow in Healthy and Obstructed Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) is a practical and affordable tool that measures maximum inspiratory flow rate through both nostrils. Although NPIF values for healthy controls and patients appear to differ considerably, a generally expected value for populations with and without nasal obstruction has yet to be established. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the mean NPIF value in populations with and without nasal obstruction.

METHODS

Medline (1946-) and Embase (1947-) were searched until July 1, 2017. A search strategy was used to identify studies that reported NPIF values for defined healthy or disease states. All studies providing original data were included. The study population was defined as having either normal nasal breathing or nasal obstruction. A meta-analysis of the mean data was presented in forest plots, and data were presented as mean (95% confidence interval [CI]).

RESULTS

The search yielded 1,526 studies, of which 29 were included. The included studies involved 1,634 subjects with normal nasal breathing and 817 subjects with nasal obstruction. The mean NPIF value for populations with normal nasal breathing was 138.4 (95% CI: 127.9-148.8) L/min. The mean value for populations with nasal obstruction was 97.5 (95% CI: 86.1-108.8) L/min.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence confirms a difference between mean NPIF values of populations with and without nasal obstruction. The mean value of subjects with no nasal obstruction is 138.4 L/min, and the mean value of nasally obstructed populations is 97.5 L/min. Prospective studies adopting a standardized procedure are required to further assess normative NPIF values. Laryngoscope, 131:260-267, 2021.

A novel device combining acoustic vibration with oscillating expiratory pressure for the treatment of nasal congestion

BACKGROUND

Chronic nasal congestion affects 20% of the population with significant impact on quality of life. This study investigated the simultaneous administration of nasal acoustic vibration and oscillating expiratory pressure for the treatment of nasal congestion.

METHODS

Patients with chronic nasal congestion but without fixed anatomic obstruction participated in a prospective clinical study applying simultaneous acoustic vibrations and positive expiratory pressure to the nasal cavity twice daily over 5 weeks. Safety was assessed by rhinoscopy and patient questionnaires. Efficacy was assessed using peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), visual analogue scale (VAS) of nasal symptoms, Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) score, and the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22).

RESULTS

Forty patients (mean age 39 years, 65% female) completed the study with no adverse effects. At the 2 week follow-up, PNIF improved by 25.0 L/min (31% increase from baseline, p < 0.001). At the 5 week follow-up, nasal congestion VAS improved from mean ± SD of 5.8 ± 2.4 to 2.6 ± 2.3, TNSS improved from 7.2 ± 3.5 to 3.5 ± 3.1, NOSE improved from 50.4 ± 19.9 to 23.3 ± 17.2, and SNOT-22 improved from 31.7 ± 20.3 to 14.2 ± 12.7, all p < 0.001. Eighty percent of patients would use the device again and 87.5% would recommend to others.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous administration of acoustic vibration and oscillating expiratory pressure appears to be a safe treatment for chronic nasal congestion. Results from this initial study are promising with regard to efficacy but will require further study.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Nasal Airway Obstruction: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

Importance

Nasal airway obstruction (NAO) is a common complaint in the otolaryngologist's office and can have a negative influence on quality of life (QOL). Existing diagnostic methods have improved, but little consensus exists on optimal tools. Furthermore, although surgical techniques for nasal obstruction continue to be developed, effective outcome measurement is lacking. An update of recent advances in diagnostic and therapeutic management of NAO is warranted.

Objective

To review advances in diagnosis and treatment of NAO from the last 5 years.

Evidence Review

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, Web of Science, and Guideline.gov were searched with the terms nasal obstruction and nasal blockage and their permutations from July 26, 2012, through October 23, 2017. Studies were included if they evaluated NAO using a subjective and an objective technique, and in the case of intervention-based studies, the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale and an objective technique. Exclusion criteria consisted of animal studies; patients younger than 14 years; nasal foreign bodies; nasal masses including polyps; choanal atresia; sinus disease; obstructive sleep apnea or sleep-disordered breathing; allergic rhinitis; and studies not specific to nasal obstruction.

Findings

The initial search resulted in 942 articles. After independent screening by 2 investigators, 46 unique articles remained, including 2 randomized clinical trials, 3 systematic reviews, 3 meta-analyses, and 39 nonrandomized cohort studies (including a combined systematic review and meta-analysis). An aggregate of approximately 32 000 patients were reviewed (including meta-analyses). Of the subjective measures available for NAO, the NOSE scale is outstanding with regard to disease-specific validation and correlation with symptoms. No currently available objective measure can be considered a criterion standard. Structural measures of flow, pressure, and volume appear to be necessary but insufficient to assess NAO. Therefore, novel variables and techniques must continue to be explored in search of an ideal instrument to aid in assessment of surgical outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

Nasal airway obstruction is a clinical diagnosis with considerable effects on QOL. An adequate diagnosis begins with a focused history and physical examination and requires a patient QOL measure such as the NOSE scale. Objective measures should be adjunctive and require further validation for widespread adoption. These results are limited by minimal high-quality evidence among studies and the risk of bias in observational studies.

Level of Evidence

NA.

Correlation Between Peak Nasal Flow Reversibility and Mucociliary Clearance in Allergic Rhinitis

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Reversibility of nasal airflow after decongestion measured by rhinomanometry is associated with the severity of allergic inflammation. Peak nasal flow is a simpler alternative method for assessing nasal patency. The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between changes in peak nasal expiratory and inspiratory flows (PNEFs and PNIFs) after decongestion and nasal mucociliary clearance times (NMCCTs).

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center, prospective cross-sectional study.

METHODS

One hundred one allergic rhinitis patients were enrolled. Nasal symptoms and NMCCTs were assessed. PNEF and PNIF were performed before and after decongestion. Correlations between changes in PNEF and PNIF after decongestion and NMCCTs were analyzed. One-half the standard deviation of baseline peak nasal flows was used to estimate the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and discriminate between patients with reversible mucosa and with irreversible mucosa.

RESULTS

PNEF showed more peak flow improvements after decongestion compared to PNIF. Changes in PNEF had better negative correlations with NMCCTs than PNIF (ρ = -0.49, P < .001 and ρ = -0.34, P < .001, respectively). The MCID values of the PNEF and PNIF were 27.93 and 19.74, respectively. In comparisons of NMCCTs between patients with or without MCID of peak nasal flow after decongestion, PNEF had better discrimination ability compared to PNIF (P = .003 and P = .026, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The limitation of reversibility as measured by peak nasal flows could indirectly point to the affection of mucosal inflammation as indicated by NMCCTs. PNEF is more sensitive to assess peak flow changes after decongestion than PNIF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Laryngoscope, 130:1372-1376, 2020.

A pilot study to determine the effects of nasal co-phenylcaine on drug-induced sleep endoscopy

Purpose

The use of nasal decongestant and nasal anaesthesia is currently not recommended during drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) according to the European position paper. The evaluation of the effects of nasal decongestant/anaesthesia on DISE has not been performed before and our aim is to perform a pilot study to determine whether nasal decongestants/anaesthesia affects DISE outcomes.

Methods

27 patients undergoing DISE for OSA or for simple snoring were included. On each patient, DISE was performed twice, before and approximately 10 min after the administration of two puffs of co-phenylcaine nasal spray (lidocaine hydrochloride 5%, phenylephrine 0.5%, and benzalkonium chloride 0.01%) into each nostril. A nasal peak inspiratory flow was used for the objective assessment of nasal airway obstruction. During the first and the second DISE the loudness of the snoring was also recorded.

Results

Change in DISE total grading after nasal spray administration was not statistically significant. For the same grading, changes in percentage of contribution to collapse were not statistically significant. Sex, AHI, BMI, tonsils grade, presence of rhinitis, turbinate hypertrophy, nasal septal deviation, or nasal peak inspiratory flow limitation had no influence on the effect of nasal spray. Co-phenylcaine did not significantly influence the loudness of snoring.

Conclusions

Our pilot study supports the use of co-phenylcaine nasal spray during DISE and the positive effects of the nasal spray do not influence the grading outcome. Importantly, the decongestant enhances the nasal assessment during DISE and potentially aids in the diagnosis of nasal obstruction while the nasal anaesthetic component may be beneficial by reducing nasal discomfort during DISE and thereby helping to reduce the total dose of intravenous anaesthetic administered. However, further studies on a larger population are needed to confirm our results.

Effects of decongestant addition to intranasal corticosteroid for chronic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) is the most efficacious medicine for treating chronic rhinitis. A decongestant and INCS combination (INCS-D) is considered for nasal congestion that is not improved by INCS. This study aimed to investigate the effects of INCS-D on chronic rhinitis.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Randomized controlled trials studying the effects of INCS-D vs INCS alone for treating chronic rhinitis were included. Data were pooled for meta-analysis. Outcomes were nasal symptoms, disease-specific quality of life, objective tests for nasal patency, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Six studies (1071 patients) met the inclusion criteria. There were no differences between INCS-D and INCS on total nasal symptom scores (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.09 to 0.40; p = 0.18), nasal congestion scores (SMD -0.13; 95% CI, -0.46 to 0.20; p = 0.43), and the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score (SMD -0.12; 95% CI, -0.66 to 0.42; p = 0.66). After 1 week, there were no differences on objective tests for nasal patency (acoustic rhinometry: SMD 0.04; 95% CI, -0.68 to 0.76, p = 0.91; and peak nasal inspiratory flow: SMD 0.08; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.32; p = 0.52). Adverse events were not different between INCS-D and INCS (risk ratio 1.09; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.62).

CONCLUSION

Meta-analyses did not show benefits of topical decongestants addition to INCS. Adverse events of INCS-D were comparable with INCS.

Update on the evidence for functional rhinoplasty techniques

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Functional rhinoplasty is a term that is commonly used to describe any technique used to address nasal obstruction in the nasal valve region. The cause of nasal valve collapse differs based on the site. Internal valve collapse may be idiopathic or associated with previous rhinoplasty, trauma, or weakened cartilage in older patients. External valve collapse is usually idiopathic and less likely to be associated with previous surgery. Various techniques have been developed over time, and the data in support of functional rhinoplasty continue to increase.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article discusses popular techniques currently in use, as well as newer techniques that have been described over the past several years. In addition, there is a trend toward utilizing objective testing and validated assessment scales to assess postoperative changes.

SUMMARY

Functional rhinoplasty utilizes a multitude of techniques to address nasal valve collapse. Although high-level data are lacking, the current literature is in support of nasal valve correction to improve nasal breathing. Most importantly, the technique employed is unique for each patient.