Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24574085›Full record

Trial reportInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2014

Nasal saline irrigation has no effect on normal olfaction: a prospective randomized trial.

Jack J Liu, Guy C Chan, Avi S Hecht, Dan R Storm, Greg E Davis

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparison of the Healing Effect of Nasal Saline Irrigation with Triamcinolone Acetonide Versus Nasal Saline Irrigation alone in COVID-19 Related Olfactory Dysfunction: A Randomized Controlled Study.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2022
    Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jack J Liu
Guy C Chan
Avi S Hecht
Dan R Storm
Greg E Davis
University of Washington · US

Funding

Institute of Translational Health SciencesKL2TR000421 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DISIS, MARY L. · 2012 to 2016
$12.6M
Institute for Translational Health Science (KL2)KL2RR025015 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DISIS, MARY L. · 2007 to 2011
$9.3M
Research Training in OtolaryngologyT32DC000018 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STONE, JENNIFER S. · 1989 to 2023
$7.8M
REGULATION OF CAMP TRANSIENTS IN NEURONSR01DC004156 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STORM, DANIEL R · 1999 to 2013
$4.3M
Institute for Translational Health Science (TL1)TL1RR025016 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DISIS, MARY L. · 2007 to 2011
$2.7M
Institute of Translational Health SciencesTL1TR000422 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DISIS, MARY L. · 2012 to 2016
$2.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000421NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR000422NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR025015NCRR NIH HHS TL1 RR025016NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC004156NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000018NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000018-27NIGMS NIH HHS L30 GM082982
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNasal saline irrigation is a safe treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis; however, its effect on olfaction is unclear. Cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) is a key second messenger in the mechanism of olfaction and has been shown to be associated with smell function. In animal studies, olfactory cilia may be harvested by simple saline preparations. This study aimed to characterize the effect of nasal saline irrigation on smell function.

methodsVolunteers with normal olfaction were randomized into a control or irrigation cohort. In the initial appointment, subjects completed a University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and nasal samples were obtained by 2 methods: the nasal curette and cytobrush. The irrigation cohort performed daily nasal saline irrigations. Both cohorts then returned in 1 week. The UPSIT and nasal cell collection were repeated, and each subject completed a subjective olfactory transition scale. Nasal samples were processed for cAMP levels using a commercial assay.

resultsThirty-two subjects were enrolled and randomized into each cohort. Control and postirrigation mean UPSIT scores were 36.8 and 36.7 (p = 0.48). No subjects reported a subjective smell loss. Ten pairs of nasal samples were assayed. Using the curette, control and postirrigation cAMP levels were 509 and 490 fmol/(mg/mL), respectively (p = 0.94). Using the cytobrush, respective cAMP levels were 424 and 449 fmol/(mg/mL), respectively (p = 0.94).

conclusionNasal saline irrigation has no subjective or objective effect on olfaction. It also does not appear to affect cAMP levels, a potential marker of smell function.

Indexed as

AdultCyclic AMPFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNasal CavityNasal LavageProspective StudiesSmellSodium ChlorideTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultCyclic AMPSodium Chloride

Identifiers

PMID24574085
PMCPMC4085125
OpenAlexW1889853537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.