SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 6 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corticosteroids as standalone or add-on treatment for sore throat.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Corticosteroids for septic arthritis in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Cyclamen europaeum extract for acute sinusitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Guideline
- Corticosteroids for the common cold.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Intranasal steroids for acute sinusitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- High-Dose vs Standard-Dose Amoxicillin Plus Clavulanate for Adults With Acute Sinusitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- High-dose versus standard-dose amoxicillin/clavulanate for clinically-diagnosed acute bacterial sinusitis: A randomized clinical trial.PloS one · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Herbal drug BNO 1016 is safe and effective in the treatment of acute viral rhinosinusitis.Acta oto-laryngologica · 2015Trial
- Urinary catheters: state of the art and future perspectives - a narrative review.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Review
- Article
- Mapping the evidence about the natural history of acute infections commonly seen in primary care and managed with antibiotics: a scoping review.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Long-term benefits of EPsFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Vascular permeability in chronic rhinosinusitis enhances accumulation and retention of nanoscale pegylated liposomes.Nanomedicine : nanotechnology, biology, and medicine · 2021Article
- Inter-society consensus for the use of inhaled corticosteroids in infants, children and adolescents with airway diseases.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2021Article
- Choosing Wisely Canada rhinology recommendations.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale · 2020Review
- Acute bacterial sinusitis in children: an updated review.Drugs in context · 2020Review
- Update on Intranasal Medications in Rhinosinusitis.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on 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 in adults and children. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 4, MEDLINE (January 1966 to May week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1990 to May 2013) and bibliographies of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing INCS treatment to placebo or no intervention in adults and children with 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 data, assessed trial quality and resolved discrepancies by consensus. MAIN
resultsNo new trials were found for inclusion in this update. Four studies involving 1943 participants with acute sinusitis met our inclusion criteria. The trials were well-designed and double-blind and studied INCS versus placebo or no intervention for 15 or 21 days. The rates of loss to follow-up were 7%, 11%, 41% and 10%. When we combined the results from the three trials included in the meta-analysis, participants receiving INCS were more likely to experience resolution or improvement in symptoms than those receiving placebo (73% versus 66.4%; risk ratio (RR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.18). Higher doses of INCS had a stronger effect on improvement of symptoms or complete relief: for mometasone furoate 400 µg versus 200 µg (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 rates for the two treatment groups and for groups receiving higher doses of INCS. AUTHORS'
conclusionsCurrent evidence is limited for acute sinusitis confirmed by radiology or nasal endoscopy 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.