SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009
Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic corticosteroids for acute sinusitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Guideline
- Intranasal corticosteroids in management of acute sinusitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of family medicinePooled it
- Systemic corticosteroid monotherapy for clinically diagnosed acute rhinosinusitis: a randomized controlled trial.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2012Trial
- Overuse of diagnostic tools and medications in acute rhinosinusitis in Spain: a population-based study (the PROSINUS study).BMJ open · 2018Observational
- Diagnosis and Management of Rhinosinusitis: Highlights from the 2015 Practice Parameter.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2016Review
- Evidence and evidence gaps in therapies of nasal obstruction and rhinosinusitis.GMS current topics in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery · 2016Review
- A guide to the management of acute rhinosinusitis in primary care: management strategy based on best evidence and recent European guidelines.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013Article
- PURLs: Rethinking antibiotics for sinusitis: again.The Journal of family practice · 2012Article
- Acute sinusitis.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2011Article
- Evaluation and management of the patient with "sinus".The Medical clinics of North America · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute sinusitis is a common reason for primary care visits. It causes significant symptoms and often results in time off work and school.
objectivesWe examined whether intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are effective in relieving symptoms of acute sinusitis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2008, issue 4) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE (January 1966 to October 2008), EMBASE (1990 to October 2008) and bibliographies of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered eligible if they compared INCS treatment to placebo treatment of a control group for acute sinusitis; acute sinusitis was defined by clinical diagnosis and confirmed by radiological evidence or by nasal endoscopy. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with either resolution or improvement of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were any adverse events that required discontinuation of treatment, drop-outs before the end of the study, rates of relapse, complications and return to school or work. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted the data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus. MAIN
resultsFour studies with 1943 participants met the inclusion criteria. The trials were well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled in which the included participants had acute sinusitis. The treatment assigned was INCS versus control treatment for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow up in the studies were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis were combined, participants receiving INCS were more likely to have resolution or improvement of symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement or complete relief of symptoms: for mometasone furoate (MFNS) 400 mcg versus 200 mcg, (RR 1.10; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.18 versus RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.11). No significant adverse events were reported and there was no significant difference in the drop-out and recurrence rate for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS. AUTHORS'
conclusionsFor acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy, current evidence is limited, but supports the use of INCS as a monotherapy or as an adjuvant therapy to antibiotics. Clinicians should weigh the modest but clinically important benefits against possible minor adverse events when prescribing therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.