Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18953552›Full record

Trial reportEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2009

Postoperative application of amphotericin B nasal spray in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, with a review of the antifungal therapy.

I Gerlinger, A Fittler, F Fónai, A Patzkó, A Mayer, L Botz

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Topical and systemic antifungal therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. The effectiveness topical amphotericin B in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis: a meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Optimal Management of Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2020
    Review
  6. Current understanding of allergic fungal rhinosinusitis.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2018
    Review
  7. Update on Intranasal Medications in Rhinosinusitis.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2017
    Review
  8. The role of infection and antibiotics in chronic rhinosinusitis.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2017
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Topical Drug Delivery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis.Current otorhinolaryngology reports · 2013
    Article
  13. Role of medical therapy in the management of nasal polyps.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2012
    Review
  14. Does amphotericin B nasal douching help prevent polyp recurrence following functional endoscopic sinus surgery?Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2011
    Article
  15. Looking after local nasal and sinus mucosa in health, disease and after surgery.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2010
    Article
  16. Article
  17. The role of fungi in diseases of the nose and sinuses.American journal of rhinology & allergy
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

I GerlingerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Medical School, University of Pécs, Munkácsy Mihály utca 2, 7621, Pecs, Hungary. i.gerlinger@freemail.hu
A Fittler
F Fónai
A Patzkó
A Mayer
L Botz
University of Pecs · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) affects 1-4% of the adult population. The etiology of this multifactorial, chronic disease, which leads to a significant impairment of the quality of life, often accompanied by nasal polyposis, is not fully understood. In the past decade, it was presumed that the disease, which causes characteristic eosinophilic infiltration of the nasal mucosa, is triggered by an enhanced (but not classical allergic IgE-type) immune response against fungal organisms in the nasal mucus. If this supposition is correct, then it appears obvious that the administration of amphotericin B nasal spray in adequate concentration following endoscopic polypectomy should be advantageous for these patients, and might even reduce the number of recurrent cases. To check on this assumption, we conducted a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial involving 33 patients, 30 of whom remained in the study throughout. Patients with nasal polyposis were operated on with an endoscopic technique between 1 November 2005 and 1 October 2006; group A (14 randomly selected patients) were treated with a nasal spray containing 5 mg/ml amphotericin B, while the placebo group B (16 randomly selected patients) received a nasal spray lacking amphotericin B. We evaluated our results with the aid of a modified Lund-Mackay CT score, the SNAQ-11 test (which assesses changes in the symptoms), a quality of life test and endoscopy. The SPSS 14.0 for Windows program was utilized to process the data of examinations performed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The CT scores of the group A patients 1 year after the operation exhibited wide scattering, without signs of recovery. The CT scores of the group B patients indicated a slight improvement, though this did not prove significant relative to group A. Both the SNAQ-11 test and the quality of life test revealed a significant improvement in each group, but the degrees of change in these tests did not differ significantly between the two groups of patients. The endoscopic findings indicated a slight improvement to the advantage of the amphotericin B-treated group 12 months after the operation. These results lead to the conclusion that the administration of amphotericin B nasal spray to patients operated on for nasal polyposis does not give rise to a significant alteration in either CT score, clinical symptoms, or quality of life. The more favorable clinical aspects observed in the amphotericin B-treated group during the endoscopic follow-up did not correspond to an improvement in the symptoms. In connection with the conclusions drawn from this study, the authors discuss the controversial data available on the fungal etiology of CRS. They critically analyze the contradictory observations and conclusions of seven recent clinical studies.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAmphotericin BAntifungal AgentsChronic DiseaseDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNasal PolypsPlacebosProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRecurrenceRhinitisSinusitisAmphotericin BAntifungal AgentsPlacebos

Identifiers

PMID18953552
OpenAlexW2016017222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.