Prevalence of asthma, aspirin sensitivity and allergy in chronic rhinosinusitis: data from the UK National Chronic Rhinosinusitis Epidemiology Study

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common disorder associated with other respiratory tract diseases such as asthma and inhalant allergy. However, the prevalence of these co-morbidities varies considerably in the existing medical literature and by phenotype of CRS studied. The study objective was to identify the prevalence of asthma, inhalant allergy and aspirin sensitivity in CRS patients referred to secondary care and establish any differences between CRS phenotypes. Methods: All participants were diagnosed in secondary care according to international guidelines and invited to complete a questionnaire including details of co-morbidities and allergies. Data were analysed for differences between controls and CRS participants and between phenotypes using chi-squared tests. Results: The final analysis included 1470 study participants: 221 controls, 553 CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNPs), 651 CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNPs) and 45 allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS). The prevalence of asthma was 9.95, 21.16, 46.9 and 73.3% respectively. The prevalence of self-reported confirmed inhalant allergy was 13.1, 20.3, 31.0 and 33.3% respectively; house dust mite allergy was significantly higher in CRSwNPs (16%) compared to CRSsNPs (9%, p < 0.001). The prevalence of self- reported aspirin sensitivity was 2.26, 3.25, 9.61 and 40% respectively. The odds ratio for aspirin sensitivity amongst those with AFRS was 28.8 (CIs 9.9, 83.8) p < 0.001. Conclusions: The prevalence of asthma and allergy in CRS varies by phenoytype, with CRSwNPs and AFRS having a stronger association with both. Aspirin sensitivity has a highly significant association with AFRS. All of these comorbidities are significantly more prevalent than in non-CRS controls and strengthen the need for a more individualised approach to the combined airway

Prevalence of asthma, aspirin sensitivity and allergy in chronic rhinosinusitis: data from the UK National Chronic Rhinosinusitis Epidemiology Study

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common disorder associated with other respiratory tract diseases such as asthma and inhalant allergy. However, the prevalence of these co-morbidities varies considerably in the existing medical literature and by phenotype of CRS studied. The study objective was to identify the prevalence of asthma, inhalant allergy and aspirin sensitivity in CRS patients referred to secondary care and establish any differences between CRS phenotypes. Methods: All participants were diagnosed in secondary care according to international guidelines and invited to complete a questionnaire including details of co-morbidities and allergies. Data were analysed for differences between controls and CRS participants and between phenotypes using chi-squared tests. Results: The final analysis included 1470 study participants: 221 controls, 553 CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNPs), 651 CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNPs) and 45 allergic fungal rhinosinusitis (AFRS). The prevalence of asthma was 9.95, 21.16, 46.9 and 73.3% respectively. The prevalence of self-reported confirmed inhalant allergy was 13.1, 20.3, 31.0 and 33.3% respectively; house dust mite allergy was significantly higher in CRSwNPs (16%) compared to CRSsNPs (9%, p < 0.001). The prevalence of self- reported aspirin sensitivity was 2.26, 3.25, 9.61 and 40% respectively. The odds ratio for aspirin sensitivity amongst those with AFRS was 28.8 (CIs 9.9, 83.8) p < 0.001. Conclusions: The prevalence of asthma and allergy in CRS varies by phenoytype, with CRSwNPs and AFRS having a stronger association with both. Aspirin sensitivity has a highly significant association with AFRS. All of these comorbidities are significantly more prevalent than in non-CRS controls and strengthen the need for a more individualised approach to the combined airway

EUFOREA Rhinology Research Forum 2016: report of the brainstorming sessions on needs and priorities in rhinitis and rhinosinusitis

The first European Rhinology Research Forum organized by the European Forum for Research and Education in Allergy and Airway Diseases (EUFOREA) was held in the Royal Academy of Medicine in Brussels on 17th and 18th November 2016, in collaboration with the European Rhinologic Society (ERS) and the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN). One hundred and thirty participants (medical doctors from different specialties, researchers, as well as patients and industry representatives) from 27 countries took part in the multiple perspective discussions including brainstorming sessions on care pathways and research needs in rhinitis and rhinosinusitis. The debates started with an overview of the current state of the art, including weaknesses and strengths of the current practices, followed by the identification of essential research needs, thoroughly integrated in the context of Precision Medicine (PM), with personalized care, prediction of success of treatment, participation of the patient and prevention of disease as key principles for improving current clinical practices. This report provides a concise summary of the outcomes of the brainstorming sessions of the European Rhinology Research Forum 2016

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

Current Perspectives on Erythema Multiforme

Recognition and timely adequate treatment of erythema multiforme remain a major challenge. In this review, current diagnostic guidelines, potential pitfalls, and modern/novel treatment options are summarized with the aim to help clinicians with diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making. The diagnosis of erythema multiforme, that has an acute, self-limiting course, is based on its typical clinical picture of targetoid erythematous lesions with predominant acral localization as well as histological findings. Clinically, erythema multiforme can be differentiated into isolated cutaneous and combined mucocutaneous forms. Atypical erythema multiforme manifestations include lichenoid or granulomatous lesions as well as lesional infiltrates of T cell lymphoma and histiocytes. Herpes simplex virus infection being the most common cause, other infectious agents like-especially in children-Mycoplasma pneumoniae, hepatitis C virus, Coxsackie virus, and Epstein Barr virus may also trigger erythema multiforme. The second most frequently identified cause of erythema multiforme is drugs. In different studies, e.g., allopurinol, phenobarbital, phenytoin, valproic acid, antibacterial sulfonamides, penicillins, erythromycin, nitrofurantoin, tetracyclines, chlormezanone, acetylsalicylic acid, statins, as well as different TNF-α inhibitors such as adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept were reported as possible implicated drugs. Recently, cases of erythema multiforme associated with vaccination, immunotherapy for melanoma, and even with topical drugs like imiquimod have been described. In patients with recurrent herpes simplex virus-associated erythema multiforme, the topical prophylactic treatment with acyclovir does not seem to prevent further episodes of erythema multiforme. In case of resistance to one virostatic drug, the switch to an alternative drug, and in patients non-responsive to virostatic agents, the use of dapsone as well as new treatment options, e.g., JAK-inhibitors or apremilast, might be considered