22 research outputs found
Significance of Susceptible Gene Expression Profiles in Nasal Polyposis
Nasal polyposis (NP) is a common chronic inflammatory disease of the rhinosinus mucosa and a complex disease with strong genetic and environmental components. During the past 10 to 20 yr, many studies have been performed to determine differential gene expression profiles between NP and normal nasal tissues, in order to identify susceptible genes that are associated with NP-related traits. Despite achievement in the identification of candidate genes and their associated pathogenic pathways, the large challenges remain as the genetic and molecular alterations required for its development and progression are still unclear. Therefore, the development of novel, powerful tools for gene discovery, and a closer integration of genetics and medical biology would provide valuable insight into the pathogenesis of NP
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Register; CENTRAL (2015, Issue 8); MEDLINE; EMBASE; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials.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 placeboThree 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 corticosteroidsOne 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 corticosteroidsOne 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 corticosteroidsOne 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
Pattern of Inflammation and Impact of Staphylococcus Aureus Enterotoxins in Nasal Polyps from Southern China
Endotyping of Chronic Rhinosinusitis With and Without Polyp Using Transcription Factor Analysis
Highlights of eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in definition, prognosis, and advancement
Background: Tissue eosinophils are characteristic of inflammation in most but not all patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and may be useful for defining subgroups and making treatment choices. However, no consistent diagnostic criteria for CRSwNP with eosinophilic inflammation have been established.
Methods: Related literature review was performed and current developments in the diagnosis of eosinophilic CRSwNP were summarized. Details in histopathology, definition of tissue eosinophilia, eosinophil as an indicator of disease recurrence, eosinophilic shift, and related biomarkers in CRSwNP are included in this review article.
Results: Mucosal eosinophilia exhibits significant geographic and ethnic differences and may increase over time. Tissue eosinophilia can be defined using a cutoff value based on reference values from healthy mucosa, but typical disease-specific values should also be employed to increase sensitivity and specificity for clinical use. Recent developments highlight the diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic CRSwNP based on cluster analysis, which were also associated with clinical outcomes. Additionally, some promising eosinophil-relevant biomarkers, such as eosinophilic cation protein and interleukin 5 (IL-5), may be clinically applied as diagnostic or predictive tools for CRSwNP in the future.
Conclusion: Sinonasal tissue eosinophilia is present in a majority of CRSwNP patients but is currently more common in the West than in the East. Cutoff values of eosinophils as the diagnostic criteria of eosinophilic CRSwNP are subject to change with geographic and ethnic differences over time. It will be important to identify validated eosinophil-related biomarkers in different continents/countries for future research and for the introduction of precision medicine