Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32852889›Full record

Trial reportClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2021

Manuka honey versus saline sinus irrigation in the treatment of cystic fibrosis-associated chronic rhinosinusitis: A randomised pilot trial.

Victoria S Lee, Ian M Humphreys, Patricia L Purcell, Greg E Davis

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medical interventions for chronic rhinosinusitis in cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Manuka Honey Sinus Irrigation Versus Systemic Itraconazole in Allergic Fungal Rhinosinusitis: Randomised Clinical Trial for Efficacy and Safety.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2026
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Manuka honey as a non-antibiotic alternative againstFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Victoria S LeeDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3221-126X
Ian M HumphreysDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Patricia L PurcellDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Greg E DavisDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
University of Washington · USUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

Research Training in OtolaryngologyT32DC000018 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STONE, JENNIFER S. · 1989 to 2023
$7.8M
Derma Sciences A98316NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesManuka honey attacks biofilms, which contribute to bacterial persistence in cystic fibrosis sinusitis. The primary objective was to determine feasibility of investigating manuka honey as an irrigation treatment for cystic fibrosis sinusitis and secondarily to assess the treatment's preliminary effectiveness.

designProspective, single-blinded (clinician only), randomised, parallel two-arm pilot trial.

settingTertiary rhinology clinic.

participantsSubjects had recalcitrant cystic fibrosis sinusitis and previous sinus surgery. They received manuka honey or saline sinus irrigations twice daily for 30 days.

main outcome measuresMain outcomes were recruitment/retention rates and tolerability. Preliminary effectiveness was assessed based on quality-of-life Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 and Lund-Kennedy endoscopic change scores and post-treatment culture negativity.

resultsOver 10 months, 13 subjects were enrolled, and 77% (10/13) were included in the analysis. Manuka honey irrigations were well-tolerated. The quality-of-life change score was clinically significant for manuka honey (-9 [-14,-6]) but not saline (-5 [-9,-1]), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .29). Lund-Kennedy endoscopic change score was significantly better for manuka honey (-3 [-5,-3]) versus saline (0 [0,0]) (P = .006). There was no difference in post-treatment culture negativity between manuka honey (1/5, 20%) and saline (0/5, 0%) (P = 1.00).

conclusionsManuka honey irrigations were well tolerated, and retention rates were high. Preliminary data showed that manuka honey achieved a clinically important difference in quality-of-life score and a significantly better endoscopic outcome. Microbiological control was difficult to achieve. A future definitive trial would require multi-institutional recruitment.

Indexed as

ApitherapyHoneyPilot ProjectsAdultChronic DiseaseCystic FibrosisFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesRhinitisSingle-Blind MethodSinusitisTherapeutic Irrigationcystic fibrosisgeneral: evidence-based medicineoutcomesquality of liferhinosinusitis and complicationsspecialities: endoscopic sinus surgery

Identifiers

PMID32852889
PMCPMC7895450
OpenAlexW3081424848

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.