ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2011
Treatment of adenotonsillar hypertrophy: A prospective randomized trial comparing azithromycin vs. fluticasone.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of changes in oral and dental health and deleterious oral habits after adenoidectomy or adenotonsillectomy in children.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Oral Health and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Children with Adenoid Hypertrophy.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Intranasal Corticosteroids and Oral Montelukast for Paediatric Obstructive Sleep Apnoea: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- The Role of Telemedicine in Children with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS): A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The First-Line Approach in Children with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSA).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- 150th Anniversary of global adenoid investigations: unanswered questions and unsolved problems.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- The Long-Term Effects of 12-Week Intranasal Steroid Therapy on Adenoid Size, Its Mucus Coverage and Otitis Media with Effusion: A Cohort Study in Preschool Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the Effects of Adenotonsillar Hypertrophy on Oral Health in Children.BioMed research international · 2021Article
- Paediatrics: how to manage obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome.Drugs in context · 2021Review
- Article
- Adenoidectomy in Children: What Is the Evidence and What Is its Role?Current otorhinolaryngology reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of azithromycin vs. fluticasone in treatment of adenotonsillar hypertrophy (AH).
methodsIn a clinical trial, 39 AH patients were selected using a convenient time-based sequential sampling method. The subjects were randomized into two treatment groups. Patients in group A (fluticasone) and B (azithromycin) were respectively treated with fluticasone spray and azithromycin suspension for a 6-week period. Data regarding the grade of obstruction (based on tonsillar size), level of adenotonsillar hypertrophy, and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) symptoms (including mouth breathing, snoring, hyponasal speech, and sleep apnea) were collected by a self-administrated questionnaire before treatment, as well as 1 week and 8 weeks after treatment.
resultsTwenty AH patients in group A and 19 AH patients in group B were studied. AH related symptoms, including mouth breathing, snoring, hyponasal speech and sleep apnea, improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05). We also found a statistically significant reduced grade of obstruction among patients in both groups. However, fluticasone was not effective on adenotonsillar hypertrophy. One week after treatment, outcomes related to apnea and hyponasal speech were better in group B than group A. Decreases in mouth breathing and snoring were not significantly different between group A and B.
conclusionsIt could explain that though both of the improved and mentioned symptoms comparing within initial status, Azithromycin seems to be more effective than fluticasone in improving AH-related symptoms. Short term efficacy of the antibiotic is much significant than its long term effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22973368PMC3434901W2168635428What 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.