ArticleCureus2024
Delivering Therapy to the Olfactory Cleft: A Comparison of the Various Methods of Administering Topical Nasal Medications.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intranasal drug delivery: Unlocking the nose-to-brain route for central nervous system therapies.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background and objective Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory condition affecting the nasal mucosa, and it causes olfactory dysfunction (OD) in up to 78.2% of patients. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment to shrink nasal polyposis, reduce inflammation, and improve olfactory function. While many delivery methods for topical nasal corticosteroids exist, there is scarce data on the efficacy of the various medication delivery methods to the olfactory cleft (OC). In light of this, this study aimed to compare the following delivery methods to the OC: conventional nasal spray (NS), nasal drops in the Kaiteki position (KP), and exhalation delivery system (EDS). Methods We evaluated 16 sinonasal cavities from eight cadaver specimens in this study. Each sinonasal cavity was administered fluorescein dye solution via NS, KP, and EDS. Following administration, nasal endoscopy was employed to capture staining patterns in the OC. OC staining was rated with scores ranging from 0 (no staining) to 3 (heavy staining) after each administration of dye solution. Mean OC staining ratings were calculated and compared using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results The mean OC staining score for the different delivery methods was as follows - NS: 1.095 ± 1.008, EDS: 0.670 ± 0.674, and KP: 2.038 ± 1.097. Nasal drops in the KP had a significantly higher staining score compared to NS (p=0.041) and EDS (p=0.003). However, there was no significant difference in staining scores between NS and EDS. Conclusions Nasal drops in the KP are more effective at reaching the OC than NS or EDS and should be considered as a first-line modality for administering topical medications when treating OD.
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.