International Consensus Statement on Rhinology and Allergy: Rhinosinusitis

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

Role of imbalance of eicosanoid pathways and staphylococcal superantigens in chronic rhinosinusitis

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a multifactorial disease of the upper airways with a high prevalence (approximately 11%) in the general population. Different immune and inflammatory mechanisms are involved in its pathogenesis. Alterations in the arachidonic acid pathway (leading to an imbalanced production of eicosanoids) have been linked to the pathophysiology of different diseases especially nasal polyposis, asthma, and aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. Furthermore, viral and bacterial infections have been identified as important factors amplifying the pro-inflammatory reactions in these pathologies. This review summarizes the impact of an imbalance in the eicosanoid pathway and the effect of Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxins on the regulation of the pro-inflammatory network in CRS and their translation into disease severity.Flemish Research Board (FWO Post-doctoral mandate)European UnionSão Paulo State Military Police-Health Department, BrazilFlemish Scientific Research Board FWOInteruniversity Attraction Poles ProgramUniv Ghent, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, Upper Airways Res Lab, B-9000 Ghent, BelgiumJagiellonian Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Krakow, PolandUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, São Paulo, BrazilMedex, Bielsko Biala, PolandUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Otorhinolaryngol, São Paulo, BrazilFlemish Research Board (FWO Post-doctoral mandate): FWO08-PDO-117European Union: 17Flemish Scientific Research Board FWO: A12/5-HB-KH3Flemish Scientific Research Board FWO: G.0436.04Interuniversity Attraction Poles Program: IAP P6/35Web of Scienc

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group