ReviewCurrent allergy and asthma reports2020
Safety of Intranasal Steroids: an Updated Perspective.
Review in Current allergy and asthma reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of randomised controlled trials on topical nasal steroids.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluating the efficacy and safety of Stapokibart (CM310) in the treatment of uncontrolled seasonal allergic rhinitis based on real-world research.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 · 2026Article
- Therapeutic potential of saponins for allergic rhinitis: Molecular mechanisms and clinical perspectives (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2026Review
- Cushing's syndrome in a young woman due to prolonged betamethasone nasal drop use: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Article
- 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
- Morphological and Functional Changes of Meibomian Glands in Pediatric and Adult Patients with Allergic Conjunctivitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- 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
- Daily Saline Nasal Douching for Chronic Allergic Rhinosinusitis: An Autobiographical Case Report.Cureus · 2022Article
- The Effectiveness of the Bacteria Derived Extremolyte Ectoine for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis.BioMed research international · 2021Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewIntranasal corticosteroid sprays have been available as over-the-counter (OTC) medications since 2013. As such, clinicians need to be up-to-date with the risks and the safety of INS, as patients may have concerns and detailed questions. The following is a review of the recent medical literature regarding the safety profile, adverse reactions, and special populations using INS. RECENT
findingsThe latest research on intranasal steroid sprays (INS) continue to confirm that INS rarely have significant local side effects, such as severe and persistent epistaxis. Recent studies looking at systemic side effects such as hypothalamic pituitary axis suppression, growth effects, and ocular effects do not indicate any new concerns nor have found significant differences from the past literature. The use of combination INS and topical antihistamine medications did not reveal any new safety issues. Use of INS with topical decongestants found some limited effects of tachyphylaxis and rebound congestion. Studies continue to support the use of newer INS for children and continued monitoring of growth in this population. The HIV population should avoid use of INS with the prescription of ritonavir, given demonstration of adrenal suppression. This updated perspective has found that newer generation INS should be used at the lowest effective dose for the selected population, that clinicians can inform patients using the OTC INS preparations that there are very few safety concerns, and that regular follow-up visits can provide further reassurance with physical examinations and address patient's questions. Future research regarding the safety of INS should study newer preparations when developed and if used in combination with other topical agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32893309What 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.