Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23455580›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2013

Nasal douches for diseases of the nose and the paranasal sinuses--a comparative in vitro investigation.

Janna Campos, Werner Heppt, Rainer Weber

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02559284 (A Comparative, Multicenter and Randomized Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of RESPIMER® Netiflow® Versus Saline Solutions During Nasal Irrigation Following Bilateral Ethmoidectomy in the Treatment of Nasal Polyposis.), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

NCT02559284 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

A Comparative, Multicenter and Randomized Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of RESPIMER® Netiflow® Versus Saline Solutions During Nasal Irrigation Following Bilateral Ethmoidectomy in the Treatment of Nasal Polyposis.

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaboratoire de la MerRan2015 to 2017Enrolled189ConditionsPolyp of Ethmoidal Sinus, SurgeryArmsA postoperative care after ethmoid sinus surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label study to compare efficacy of a mineral-rich solution vs normal saline after complete ethmoidectomy.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 · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. The Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024
    Review
  4. A novel irrigation device with superior nasal irrigation efficiency to the classic rinse bottle.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Nasal Irrigation: An Imprecisely Defined Medical Procedure.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Review
  11. Comprehensive review on endonasal endoscopic sinus surgery.GMS current topics in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery · 2015
    Review
  12. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Janna CamposENT Department, Hospital of Karlsruhe, Moltkestr. 90, 76133, Karlsruhe, Germany, jannaswelt@yahoo.de.
Werner Heppt
Rainer Weber
Philipps University of Marburg · DEStädtisches Klinikum Karlsruhe · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nasal douches are applied in great number of diseases of the nose and the paranasal sinuses. For this purpose, many different kinds of nasal douching systems have been introduced into the market. The aim of this study was to examine the irrigation characteristics of the current nasal douching systems. In this context, 26 nasal douching systems were compared regarding irrigation volume, irrigation duration, flow rate and pressure and course of the irrigation stream. The following procedure was applied: First, the spontaneous flow through the nasal douche was measured, then the flow under compression. Finally, these procedures were repeated using a nose model. Furthermore, we asked the manufacturers for information concerning possible cleaning and disinfection techniques. Douching period and flow rate highly depend on physical parameters: distance between liquid column and outlet (hydrostatic pressure) and form and size of the outlet (energy loss because of friction/turbulence). A weak irrigation stream was found in spontaneous release of the douching system when both douching pressure and flow rate offered low values. The douching of the nose model showed that the incompressible nasal douches only reached the lower nasal passage. Only the compressible nasal douching systems led to a diffuse moisturization as well as to a perfusion of the entire nasal cavity. Systematic evaluation of the different recommended cleaning and disinfection methods of the nasal douching systems is still missing. Nasal douches are often recommended in many diseases of the nose and the paranasal sinuses. In this comparative in vitro study, physical parameters and material properties of the nasal douching systems were examined for the first time. For irrigation of the whole nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses, compressible douching systems are recommended which have a minimum output pressure of 120 mbar, a good connection of the outlet to the nostril with a possible insertion into the nasal vestibule and an irrigation stream which is directed upwards (45°). The material should be transparent, easy to clean and disinfect and should not contain harmful elements.

Indexed as

DisinfectionHumansNasal LavageParanasal SinusesPostoperative CarePressureRhinitisSinusitis

Identifiers

PMID23455580
OpenAlexW2066463241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.